Greek τέκμαρ 'sign' and τέκμωρ 'sign': Why both?

Das Nomen im Indogermanischen


Morphologie Substantiv versus Adjektiv KollektivumAkten der Arbeitstagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft

vom 14 bis 16 September 2011 in Erlangen

Herausgegeben vonNorbert Oettinger und Thomas Steer


Morphologie Substantiv versus Adjektiv Kollektivum Akten der Arbeitstagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft


Herausgegeben von Norbert Oettinger und Thomas Steer

Wiesbaden 2014Reichert Verlag

Bibliografische Information der Deutschen NationalbibliothekDie Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind

im Internet uumlber httpdnbdnbde abrufbar

copy 2014 Dr Ludwig Reichert Verlag WiesbadenISBN 978-3-95490-025-1

wwwreichert-verlagdeDas Werk einschlieszliglich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschuumltzt

Jede Verwertung auszligerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulaumlssig und strafbar

Das gilt insbesondere fuumlr Vervielfaumlltigungen UumlbersetzungenMikroverfilmungen und die Speicherung

und Verarbeitung in elektronischen SystemenGedruckt auf saumlurefreiem Papier

(alterungsbestaumlndig pH7 ndash neutral)Printed in Germany

Gedruckt mit Unterstuumltzung desbdquoInterdisziplinaumlren Zentrums Alte Weltldquo der Universitaumlt Erlangen-Nuumlrnberg

InhaltsverzeichnisInhaltsverzeichnisInhaltsverzeichnisInhaltsverzeichnis

Vorwort 7

ACKERMANN Katsiaryna Bemerkungen zu den morphonologischen Resten einiger nicht belebter ieur Kollektiva im Baltischen und Slavischen

9ndash23

CATT Adam Alvah A ldquoLostrdquo i-Stem Pāli pihi- lsquobackrsquo 24ndash31

DAHL Eystein On the semantics and syntax of the Latin lsquodouble dativersquo construction

32ndash50

DARDANO Paola Strategien der Nominalisierung im Hethitischen Die Nomina agentis

51ndash64

FELLNER Hannes A Das Femininum der thematischen Adjektiva im Tocharischen

65ndash77

FRITZ Matthias Vom Wandel zwischen den Dimensionen 78ndash87

GRESTENBERGER Laura Zur Funktion des Nominalsuffixes -i- im Vedischen und Urindogermanischen

88ndash102

HARETHARSON Joacuten Axel Das Wort fuumlr sbquoEisenlsquo im Keltischen und Germanischen und die indogermanischen -erno-Bildungen

103ndash112

KEYDANA Goumltz Ablaut in indogermanischen Primaumlrnomina Die hysterokinetischen Staumlmme

113ndash128

KIM Ronald I Ablative and comitative in Tocharian 129ndash139

KLOEKHORST Alwin The Proto-Indo-European Acrostatic Inflection Reconsidered

140ndash163

KUumlMMEL Martin J Zum bdquoproterokinetischenldquo Ablaut 164ndash179

LUumlHR Rosemarie Substantiv ndash Adjektiv ndash Pronomen als lexikalische und funktionale Koumlpfe

180ndash194

MALZAHN Melanie Das Kollektivum im Tocharischen 195ndash201

MEIER-BRUumlGGER Michael Zur Bildung von urindogermanisch melit- sbquoHoniglsquo

202ndash204

MELCHERT H Craig Anatolian Nominal Stems in -(C)o- 205ndash214

NUSSBAUM Alan J Greek τPκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τPκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo Why both 215ndash260

OLSEN Birgit Anette On the Role of Stative Markers in Indo-European Noun Formation

261ndash272

PINAULT Georges-Jean Distribution and Origins of the PIE Suffixes -ih2- 273ndash306

PLATH Robert Mykenisch e-u-te-re-u und der Lokativ Singular der i-Staumlmme im spaumltbronzezeitlichen Griechisch

307ndash317

6

PRONK Tijmen Proto-Indo-European mn-stems in Balto-Slavic 318ndash326

RAU Jeremy The History of the Indo-European Primary Comparative 327ndash341

RIEKEN Elisabeth amp WIDMER Paul Kongruiert alles Zu den Kongruenz-mustern des Pronominaladjektivs der Bedeutung sbquoall jeder ganzlsquo im Griechischen und Hethitischen

342ndash359

SCHAFFNER Stefan Die slavischen Ethnonyme des Typs poljaacutene

sbquoFeldbewohnerlsquo und die griechischen Ethnonyme auf -Xνες 360ndash383

SOMMER Florian Avestisch viš 384ndash396

STEER Thomas Von der Hysterokinese zur Amphikinese Akzentgebundener Ablaut bei der Substantivierung athematischer Adjektive

397ndash412

SUKAČ Roman Three Problems of Theoretical Morphology in Indo-European Languages

413ndash425

Greek Greek Greek Greek ττττκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo Why bothκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo Why bothκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo Why bothκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo Why both

Alan J Nussbaum

1111 The question of why Greek should have both τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo is meantin two senses

11111111 Should both τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ be thought to have been inherited from PIE or are there convincing reasons to suppose that one or even both might have been created in Greek

12121212 If in fact both go back to to pre-Greek or PIE why did they both exist in the first place

2222 To describe the Greek situation more fully it must be added as is well known that thereare actually three relevant nominal forms not only τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ but τεκmicro5ριον as well The first two are defective neuter nom-acc singulars while the third has a full inflec-tion

21212121 τκmicroωρ is the only one of these three items that is already found in Homer In the epics it mostly means lsquogoal end point endrsquo

bull hellip τ δ= ττρατον gtκετο τκmicroωρ (N 20) ldquohellip and with the fourth (stride) he reached his goalrdquo bull hellip οEδ τι τκmicroωρ εGρεmicroναι δHνασαι (δ 373) ldquohellip and you can find no end pointrdquo

It will prove to be important however to note that it also has the meaning lsquosign token sig-nalrsquo

bull hellip microετrsquo LθανNτοισι microγιστον τκmicroωρ hellip (A 526) ldquohellip supreme token among the immortalsrdquo

And a semantic overlap with σRmicroα lsquosignrsquo is made evident by a passage like the following

bull λαmicroπρUταταV τrsquo αEγαW τUτrsquo Lεξοmicroνης τελθουσιν οEρανUθενmiddot τκmicroωρ δ= βροτο^ς καW σRmicroα ττυκται (Hymn xxxii13)ldquohellip then her brightest beams from the heavens appear as she increasesAnd she serves as a sign and a token to mortal menrdquo

After Homer this form of the noun is known only from Alcman (Fr 5 [Page] = Fr 81 [Ca-lame]) and even there it is attested only indirectly1

22222222 The first occurrences of τκmicroαρ for its part are also quite early mdash in Hesiod Archilo-chus Pindar Aeschylus and the Hippocratic Corpus In these texts it means lsquodemarcation end point signrsquo

bull hellip δειλeν τε καW fσθλeν τκmicroαρ fναργς (Hes Fr 2732 [Merkelbach amp West]) ldquohellip a clear demarcation of the wretched and the noblerdquo

bull τκmicroαρ αieνος θεUφραστον λαχο^σα (Pi Fr 165) ldquohellip attaining the allotted end of herlifetime decreed by the god(s) helliprdquo

1 See Most 1987

216 Alan J Nussbaum

bull hellip τ δrsquo fκ ∆ις Lνθρnποις σαφ=ς οEχ oπεται τκmicroαρ hellip (Pi Nem 1144) ldquohellip but no clear sign comes to mortals from Zeusrdquo

23232323 Finally τεκmicro5ριον first appears in Aeschylus Sophocles Herodotus and Thucydides where it means lsquosign symptom indication piece of evidence proofrsquo

bull καW microsν στVβοι γε δεHτερον τεκmicro5ριονποδeν tmicroο^οι το^ς τrsquo fmicroο^σιν fmicroφερε^ς (Aesch Ch 205)ldquoAha Footprints mdash as a second piece of evidence mdashresembling one another and just like minerdquo

bull ΠανηγHρις δ= hellip πρeτοι Lνθρnπων ΑiγHπτιοV εiσι οy ποιησNmicroενοι καW παρz τοHτωνλληνες microεmicroαθ5κασι Τεκmicro5ριον δ microοι τοHτου τUδεmiddot(Hdt 2581)ldquoThe Egyptians are the first people who held festival assemblies hellip and the Greeks havelearned it from them My evidence for this is the following helliprdquo

bull λλrsquo fκ πNντων τeν τεκmicroηρVων τeν fUντων fν τουτοισι σηmicroαVνεσθαι καW το^σιν ~λλοισιπσιν (Hipp Progn 1734)ldquoBut it is from all the symptoms presenting themselves that one should draw conclusions inthese cases and in all the others toordquo

24242424 In addition to these nominal stems there is found from Homer onward a denominative verb of the form pres τεκmicroαVροmicroαι aor (f)τεκmicroηρNmicroην This verb has two basic sets of meanings

(a) lsquoAssign designate appoint ordainrsquo which are found both in Homer and later αEτzρ fπεW τNδε γrsquo δε θεοW κακz τεκmicro5ραντο hellip (Z 349)

ldquoBut inasmuch as the gods ordained these ills helliprdquo The semantics of τκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo andor τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo with a denominative τεκmicroαVροmicroαι meaning lsquodesignate appointrsquo are of course closely comparable to what is observable in a case like that of Latin signum lsquosignrsquo rarr as-signāre dē-signāre lsquoappoint designatersquo

(b) lsquoMake a determination (of) form a judgment (about)rsquo a meaning seen in Pi A Hdt etc ∆ηmicroNρητε Lνsρ ες LγαθUς τεκmicroαVροmicroαι δ= τ LληθεVmiddotσα γzρ επας παντα Lπβη οτω (Hdt 72343) ldquoDemaretus you are a capable man Irsquom judging by the fact of the matter For every-thing turned out just as you saidrdquo

An exact parallel to these derivational semantics in a word for lsquosignrsquo and its denominative verb is provided in Greek itself by the case of σRmicroα lsquosign tokenrsquo rarr σηmicroαVνοmicroαι lsquoconclude from signsrsquo (eg Soph Aj 32 or Hipp Progn 1734 in sect23 above for that matter)

3333 The etymology of τThe etymology of τThe etymology of τThe etymology of τκmicroαρ τκmicroαρ τκmicroαρ τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ τεκmicroκmicroωρ τεκmicroκmicroωρ τεκmicroκmicroωρ τεκmicro5555ριονριονριονριον

31313131 There seems to be universal agreement that the root of this group of Greek words is a kwe- that is otherwise reflected in a set of verb forms (and some nominal derivatives ofthese) that are almost entirely restricted to Indo-Iranian

32323232 The basic meaning of the root in these Indic and Iranian forms is lsquolook at see beholdrsquo But there are also instances of a kind of pseudo-passive lsquoappearrsquo (ie lsquobe seenrsquo) and even pseudo-causative lsquorevealrsquo (ie lsquomake appearrsquo) this last in addition to the ldquoofficialrdquo causa-tive in I-Ir -aacutea- The semantic picture will be addressed (sect333) after the relevant verb forms have been surveyed

Greek τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo and τκmicroωρ lsquosignrsquo Why both 217

33333333 Indo-Iranian verbal reflexes of kwe-

331331331331 We may first list the forms reflecting simple kwe- gt I-Ir kać- These which are not all necessarily inherited as such include2

(1) Ved pres aacuteva-kāśate lsquoappearsrsquo (ŚB+) YAv ā-kasa$ lsquobeheldrsquo3 (2) Ved caus saacute kāśayati (AV) lsquorevealsrsquo (3) Ved intens cākaśīti (RV) lsquoobservesrsquo (4) Ved aor aacutekhyat (RV) lsquosawrsquo (= -kśat [MS]) GAv inj ā-xsō lsquolookrsquo midd subj xsāi lsquowill

observersquo (5) Ved perf abhiacute cakur (RV) lsquoare looking atrsquo (kwe-kw- gt ča-kć- gt ča-kš-4)

332332332332 There are also verbal forms made from what can be set up for present purposes as I-Ir čakš- beside the kać- just mentioned

3321332133213321 The items that belong in this group are

(1) Ved pres caacutee pl caacutekate (RV) lsquoappears sees beholdsrsquo YAv cašte lsquoteachesrsquo (2) Ved caus praacute viacute cakayati (RV) lsquorevealsrsquo5

3322332233223322 Opinion has been divided on the question of the ultimate origin of the I-Ir stem čakš- It was once regarded as representing an e-reduplicated kwe-kw-6 This howeverhas since been shown to be phonologically unworkable without auxiliary hypotheses7 inas-much as an I-Ir ča-kć- would regularly yield neither Ved pres caacutee in place of which daggercaacutekte is expected nor GAv YAv cašman- lsquoeyersquo (as in sect3410 below) for which daggercaxšman- would be the predicted outcome The alternative is to trace the I-Ir čakš- in question back to a ldquobleachedrdquo desiderative -s- present from this root reflecting kwe-s- (gt I-Ir čaćs- gt čakš-) lsquosees appearsrsquo which does lead to the attested forms This is the re-construction that is now most often seen8

333333333333 A feature of this entire set of forms that obviously calls for some comment is its se-mantics which range from lsquoappearrsquo (Ved aacuteva-kāśate etc) to lsquoseersquo (Ved cākaśīti etc) to lsquorevealrsquo (and thus lsquoteachrsquo in YAv cašte) A thorough discussion of the co-occurrence of lsquoappearrsquo vs lsquoseersquo vs lsquorevealrsquo in one averbo without benefit of explicitly passive or causa-

2 On all of these see LIV2383f plus Lipp 2009II42f 3 This can be traced back to an ablauting kwē- kwĕ- (as in LIV2384 n 4 with ref) under the assumption

that the I-Ir initial velar results from a dissimilation of ča3ć- (in standard notation) to ka3ć- Despite the opin-ion of LIV2 however a kwo-oe- vs kwe-oe- would not be an impossible proposition (cf Jasanoff 2003 64ff) and would even be reminiscent of semantically comparable sor-oe- ser-oe- lsquowatchrsquo (Myc o-ro-

me-no Hom fπW hellip ρονται YAv haraiti Jasanoff 200375) In this analysis the only secondary feature seen here would be the I-Ir kać- (lt kwĕ-) allomorph reflected by YAv kas- showing a root initial analogi-cal to that of the kāć- (lt kwo-) continued by Ved kāś-

4 See especially Lipp 2009II9ff 42f 5 On the semantics (lsquocause to be seenrsquo and not lsquocause to seersquo) see Jamison 1983125 6 See EWAiaI523 for references 7 See again EWAiaI523 and especially the references to Cowgill 196929 and 37 (note 2) and Narten 196813

(note 28) Now see also Lipp 2009II42 8 So already IEW638f but without the morphological analysis as an -s- present See also Cowgill 1969 Nar-

ten 1968 and especially Lipp 2009II as in the previous note as well as Bader 1984130 The kwethorn- that goes back to Bechtel 1914310 sv τκmicroωρ is an outmoded reconstruction in any event See Schindler 1977 passim

218 Alan J Nussbaum

tive morphology obviously cannot be accommodated here9 Nor is it really essential for present purposes though a few rough indications of what might be behind the semantic sit-uation observable in these forms would perhaps not be out of place

3331333133313331 That a verb meaning lsquoset eyes upon seersquo should develop a meaning like lsquoseem ap-pearrsquo is not without parallels

33311333113331133311 A convincing case10 of such a development close to home is that of the WGmc weak verb of class ii lōkōja- lsquolook (at)rsquo (OE loacutecian OSax lōcon (gl) MDutch loeken) The plausible root etymology derives it from le7- lsquopick choose out collectrsquo as a lengthened o-grade iterative lō7āoe- (informally reconstructed) with the meaning lsquopick out dis-cernrsquo11 This of course makes this a verb of seeing in the first instance If it eventually shows up in English with a meaning like that of seem mdash as in looks good etc mdash this will obviously be an innovation The external facts bear this out inasmuch as the verb never means lsquoseemrsquo in OE and only very rarely does it have that meaning before the 16th c12 ac-cording to what can be inferred from the attestations given in the OED

33313331333133312222 The mechanism of this change can be sought in two different directions descript-tively speaking

333133313331333121212121 On the one hand it is easy to find occurrences of look in its original sense of lsquodirect onersquos vision (at)rsquo that can simply be reanalyzed in place as lsquoappear seemrsquo

Hi sul hellip lok as bestis thornat cun no witte (XV Signa 56 in Early English Poems amp Lives of Saints [a1300]) ldquoThey shall hellip look (around) as do beasts that have no experience of a mindrdquo

In such a usage

lsquolook (around) as do beastsrsquo

could be (and was) reinterpreted as

lsquoseemed as beasts seemrsquo ie lsquoseemed like beastsrsquo

The result was the ldquopredicate adverbrdquo construction seen in such instances as

You looke wearily (Shakespeare Tempest iii i 32 [1623])

The replacement of the adverbial by the synchronically better motivated adjective first found in the 16th c completed the changeover

Resolueth all the grosenes of the oyle and maketh it to loke clere (W Bonde Pylgrimage of Perfection [1526])

9 For older literature on the general phenomenon see the material collected in Morpurgo Davies 1987 459f (notes 3 and 4)

10 I am obliged to Jay Jasanoff for bringing this example to my attention 11 Tocharian AB laumlk lsquolook at see visitrsquo is a comparable case of a verb of seeing that continues forms of le7-

lsquopick out discernrsquo mdash at least by some accounts (see Adams 1999550 Malzahn 2010158ff 836ff) 12 The earliest sure examples given by the OED in any case are from that period See below


333133313331333122222222 The development of lsquoset eyes onrsquo to lsquoseem appearrsquo can also be seen as part of the much more general phenomenon of deriving pseudo-passive middles from transitive ac-tive verbs Familiar English examples include at least two kinds of things13

(1) Simple cases in which the derived middle can form an entire VP breaks the branch rarr the branch breaks

(2) More complex cases in which the derived middle cannot be alone in the VP14 feels the cloth rarr the cloth feels soft etc (the cloth feels) scares the boys rarr the boys scare easily (the boys scare) wears the material rarr the material wears well wears thin etc (the material wears)

33313333133331333313 The phenomenon of the pseudo-passive middle observable here is particularly well established with verbs of sensory perception

333131333131333131333131 In addition to the already-mentioned instance

feels the cloth rarr the cloth feels soft etc

there is also

smells the flowers rarr the flowers smell sweet tastes the food rarr the food tastes good etc

333132333132333132333132 But no example of the ldquopseudo-passiverdquo function of medial forms of verbs of perception is more conspicuous than that of the middle forms of Skt śru lsquohearrsquo In the RV pres active forms (śDEoacuteti etc) regularly mean lsquohear (a thing or person) listen (to)rsquo etc while the corresponding middle forms (śDEveacuteśDEuteacute etc) frequently have meanings like lsquosound (like) be heard be heard (of) be famous have a reputation (as)rsquo

śDEveacute vDeacuter iva svanaacuteG paacutevamānasya śumiacuteEaG (RV 9413 andashb) ldquothe roar of crackling Pavamāna sounds like that of the rainrdquo

vDHā hiacute ugra śDHEvieacute (RV 8614 c) ldquoYou are known mighty one as a bullrdquo

333133333133333133333133 And when it comes to verbs of seeing the development of English look from lsquoset eyes on seersquo to lsquoappear seemrsquo is matched by cases like lsquoappear shinersquo for Gk δρκοmicroαι lsquoseersquo15

Νεmicroας πιδαυρUθεν τrsquo ~πο καW ΜεγNρων δδορκεν φNος (Pi N 384) ldquothe light has shone from Nemea and Epidaurus and Megarardquo

13 The discussion here takes no direct account of denominative (mostly but not entirely deadjectival) verbs that similarly show both transitive (factitive) and intransitive (fientive) values

red rarr reddens the sky and the sky reddens sound rarr sounds the trumpet and the trumpet sounds

14 The derivation of these middles remains a fairly productive process This color photographs well This model takes a good picture

This car drives well

The soup that eats like a meal 15 See Mugler 196483ndash85 (sect2 sv δρκεσθαι)

220 Alan J Nussbaum

33314333143331433314 Given that surface-transitive verbs prominently including perceptual lexemes are not infrequently medialized in this way it is perhaps not implausible to suppose that those I-Ir reflexes of kwe that mean lsquoappearrsquo have developed this meaning from lsquolook at behold seersquo And it emerges from the survey of I-Ir kać- and čakš- stems (sectsect331ndash332) that the ldquomedialrdquo meaning lsquoappearrsquo does in fact seem confined to forms that are actu-ally middle Ved pres aacuteva-kāśate lsquoappearsrsquo (ŚB+) Ved pres (viacute) cakate lsquoappearrsquo (RV 116444a) Ved aor (saacutem) akhyata lsquolooked like resembledrsquo (RV 9617c) Furthermore it is by no means always the case that even the middle forms of kāś and cak mean lsquoappearrsquo in the RV They also mean lsquoseersquoand the like The meanings lsquosee look (at) beholdrsquo are there-fore the predominant ones which only adds support to the idea that lsquoappearrsquo is a develop-ment of lsquoseersquo in this averbo

3332333233323332 The development of lsquoseersquo to lsquorevealrsquo on the other hand appears to involve a much more specific phenomenon that is confined to the subjective experience of the visual and is accordingly less ldquolinguisticrdquo and more ldquopsychologicalrdquo (for lack of a better label)

33321333213332133321 A parallel for a semantic innovation of precisely this kind is offered by English lsquoshowrsquo OE sceacuteawian mdash just like the other reflexes of WGmc skauwōjan (OS skawon MDutch schauwen OHG scauwocircn MHG schawen ModG schauen) mdash only meant lsquolook atrsquo The original meaning is illustrated by any number of passages like

sithornthornon hie thornaeligs laacuteethan laacutest sceacuteawedon wergan gaacutestes (Beowulf 132f) ldquowhen they looked upon that hateful wicked demonrsquos spoorrdquo

This original meaning however changed to lsquoreveal exhibitrsquo mdash a development belonging to the 13th century to judge by the OED attestations A relatively early instance of the new meaning is

He schewede heom his honde and so he dude his fet (Passion of our Lord 610 in OE Misc 54 [ca 1275]) ldquoHe showed them his hands and so did he (show) his feetrdquo

33322333223332233322 It seems in fact that lsquolook at beholdrsquo etc can be conceived as something like lsquomake visible (to oneself)rsquo mdash as if setting eyes on something is like putting ldquoheadlightsrdquo on it and making it appear16 With the foregrounding of lsquomake visiblersquo and the fading of lsquoto oneselfrsquo the way is clear for a verb meaning lsquolook atrsquo to develop to lsquomake visiblersquo and thus lsquoreveal showrsquo

lsquolook atrsquo gtgt lsquomake visible (to oneself)rsquo gtgt lsquomake visiblersquo gtgt lsquoreveal show demonstratersquo

33323333233332333323 Some encouragement for such an understanding of the apparent shift of lsquolook atrsquo to lsquorevealrsquo lies in the observation that semantic change in the opposite direction mdash ie lsquore-vealrsquo to lsquoseersquo mdash is also known It is a familiar piece of received doctrine to be more pre-cise that Gk λεHσ(σ)ω lsquolook (at) seersquo (Hom Pi trag) reflects leuk-oe- and thus comes from leuk lsquolight (up)rsquo17 If so however it would seem that the semantic history was some-thing like

16 See eg Gonda 1960178f 17 So eg EDG DELG2 GEW (all sv) See also Mugler 1964248ndash249 sv λεύσσειν This Gk present has become embroiled in the difficult question of the analysis of the Arcadian word λευτον attested on a well known inscription (IG Vii3 DGEEP no 654 etc) from Tegea (see Dubois 1986177 1986223 Morpurgo Davies


lsquoilluminersquo gtgt lsquomake visiblersquo gtgt lsquomake visible (to oneself)rsquo gtgt lsquolook atrsquo

The same development would also be seen furthermore in the closely parallel Lith laacuteukiu laukti lsquolook out (for) expectrsquo18

33324333243332433324 It would therefore seem reasonable to suppose that the meaning of YAv cašte lsquoteachesrsquo in particular has developed by way of lsquorevealsrsquo from an original lsquosees observes looks atrsquo (cf Ved caacutee lsquobeholdsrsquo) much as ModE show lsquodemonstrate exhibitrsquo developed from OE sceacuteawian lsquolook uponrsquo

34343434 The I-Ir nominal forms belonging here are not especially numerous comprising only

341341341341 Ved dat ldquorootrdquo infinitive abhi- ava- vi-caacuteke lsquoto seersquo (RV) made to pres caacutee

333344442222 Ved loc sa-caacuteki which is somewhat more difficult to label than is the -caacuteke just above Locative infinitives19 are a known entity but since sa-caacuteki is constructed with an objective genitive it might be preferable to call it a ldquoroot verbal abstractrdquo mdash also obviously to caacutee

343343343343 Ved pra-kāśaacute- lsquobrightness lightrsquo (RV) and ā-kāśaacute- (Br) lsquoopen space holersquo These are compound verbal abstracts20 descriptively of the type upa-vākaacute- lsquoaddress praisersquo ( vac) mdash and so ultimately further comparable to eg pra-rekaacute- (RV) lsquosuperfluityrsquo ( OCS otŭ-lěkŭ Lith atildet-laikas lsquoleftover remnantrsquo) an analysis that theoretically implies a pre-form of the type -kwo-o- for -kāśaacute- in the first instance

344344344344 Ved su-prati-caacuteka- lsquofair to look uponrsquo ( prati cak) one of a number of -Caka- stems that make up the majority of all CaTTa- nominals in Vedic21 Cf also YAv cašan- lsquoteacherrsquo plausibly derived22 from a caša- lsquodoctrinersquo ( cašte lsquoteachesrsquo) with mąθran- lsquoprophetrsquo mąθra- lsquopronouncementrsquo as a parallel

1987 with further references) LIV2 goes so far as to set up a special PIE root leVt lsquoseersquo with no sure reflexes other than an Arcadian aor λευτοε- (attested only in a participle of which λευτον [quasi λευτnν] and λευτοντες [λευτUντες] in IG Vii16 are the lone attestations) and the better represented pres λεHσ(σ)ω (puta-tively reflecting leVt-oe-) If one rejects the longstanding theory that the -τ- of Arc λευτον and λευτοντες is a ldquographegraveme figeacuterdquo (Dubois 1986177 with notes 499 and 500 [Dubois 1986327]) conservatively represent-ing a -ts- that had once contrasted with -s(s)- (so that Arc λευτοντ- is identical to λευσ(σ)οντ-) and if in its place one adopts a pre-form leVt-oe- for these Arc forms and a leVt-oe- for λεHσ(σ)ω altogether the un-desirable consequences are (1) a root for lsquoseersquo that has reflexes only in Greek and (2) an averbo there in which full-grade leVt-oe- necessarily aorist (since leVt-oe- could hardly not be the present) is apophonically im-plausible as such If in fact one is prepared to countenance such an isolated leVt lsquoseersquo at all there would be fewer problems raised if it were supposed that Arcadian shows a pres leVt-oe- in its λευτοντ- forms while λεHσ(σ)ω elsewhere in Greek (Hom Pi trag) continues leVk-oe- as usually thought Even this however is clearly not very appealing The question will be further pursued elsewhere

18 A further parallel standardly mentioned in the literature is that of αEγNζοmicroαι (Hom+) and (-)αEγNζω (Pi+) denominatives to αEγ5 lsquobright light (sun)light (sun)beam(s)rsquo with the meaning lsquolook (at)rsquo See Bechtel 1914 74ndash75 Further discussion in Mugler 196464 sv αEγNζειν

19 See eg Macdonell 1910411 (sect588) 20 For the type see Debrunner 195460ff 21 As pointed out by Debrunner 195461 22 This is at least the analysis offered by Bartholomae in AiW sv

222 Alan J Nussbaum

345345345345 Ved aacute-pra-caZkaśa- (AV) lsquosightlessrsquo appearing ultimately to be a derivative of an intensive of the type adhi-caZkramaacute- (AV) lsquorunning acrossrsquo ( kram) but remodeled from the expected shape -cākaśaacute-23

346346346346 The expectable verbal abstract caacutekaEa- lsquoappearance sightrsquo (RV) appearing also in the bahuvrihi vi-cakaEaacute- lsquoseeing far and widersquo (RV)

347347347347 Ved hapax (RV 642) cakaacuteEi- (m) lsquoobserverrsquo standardly compared24 to the -cašani- of GAv voc sg vouru-cašānē lsquoO far-seeing onersquo

348348348348 Ved caacuteku- (n) lsquoeye eye of the sun bright glancersquo (RV) a form of disputed analy-sis and derivational history

3333444488881111 A theoretical possibility that can probably be quickly dismissed is the idea that caacuteku- is to be explained as a secondary by-form of the far more frequent Ved caacutekas- lsquoappearance brightness illumination eyersquo that was motivated by the occasional co-occur-rence of -u- and -as- stems elsewhere as in taacutepu- beside taacutepas- (both RV) lsquoheatrsquo and a couple of others This is unconvincing both because pairs of this kind are quite rare in gen-eral and also because there is no pair that would seem to be an especially plausible model for the creation of caacuteku- beside caacutekas- in particular

3482348234823482 A conspicuous suggestion in the literature25 is that this word is ultimately the sub-stantivized neut participle of the perfect seen in 3 pl cakur (sect3315 above) This analy-sis however has also been rejected26 It is unnecessary in any case to adopt so marked a solution For an analysis of caacuteku- as derived from the ultimately desiderative čak-š- re-flected by caacutee lsquoseesrsquo would present no serious problem

34343434821821821821 A notable derivational type is constituted by the set of Vedic u-stem adjectives made from secondary presents synchronically marked as desideratives by reduplication and a -sa- suffix27 Examples (RV unless otherwise indicated) include

cit lsquopay attention torsquo desid ciacutekitsa- rarr cikitsuacute- (AV) lsquocautious wisersquo dabh lsquoharm injurersquo desid diacutepsa- rarr dipsuacute- lsquodesirous of harmingrsquo dā lsquogiversquo desid diacutetsa- rarr ditsuacute- lsquodesirous of givingrsquo nid lsquocriticize rebukersquo desid niacutetsa- rarr nitsuacute- lsquocriticalrsquo vac lsquospeakrsquo desid viacutevaka- (Br) rarr vivakuacute- (AV) lsquodesirous of speakingrsquo śak lsquobring about achieversquo desid śiacuteka- rarr śikuacute- lsquodesirous of achievingrsquo

34343434822822822822 The -su- of these adjectives from desideratives however is highly reminiscent of that of a couple of very isolated Vedic adjectives that have traditionally been analyzed as showing a vanishingly rare suffix of the form -su-28 The two that are assigned to this type are

dah lsquoburnrsquo rarr daacuteku- (and dhaacuteku-29) (RV) lsquoburningrsquo

23 So Debrunner 195484 24 See EWAiaI524 with further references 25 See again EWAiaI524 for references to which now add Lipp 2009II10 42 26 Again see EWAia as in the previous note with particular reference to Narten 196813 (note 28) 27 Debrunner 1954468 The -sa- desideratives also typically make verbal abstracts in -sā- (Debrunner 1954

242ndash243) 28 Debrunner 1954926 29 On the alternate forms see Schindler 1976631f


raE lsquoenjoy oneselfrsquo rarr raacutesu-30 (RV) lsquodelightfulrsquo

In at least one of these instances a reasonable case can be made for the derivation of the same sort of deverbative -u- adjective from a much less productive type of desiderative present than those exemplified just above mdash an athematic one with the simple structure Root + -s- that originally showed acrostatic êacute inflectional root ablaut in the reconstruction adopted here31 The case in question is that of the Vedic verb stem daacutek-- (and dhaacutek--) de-rived from dah lsquoburnrsquo which would reflect a dheacutegwh-s- to dhegwh- in PIE terms A trace of this -s- present may still be seen in the Ved participle d(h)aacutekat- which shows a fixed -at- in the participial suffix (masc nom sg d(h)aacutekat gen sg d(h)aacutekat-aG) reflecting non-ab-lauting -_t- throughout the paradigm and thus consistent with mdash or even positively sug-gesting mdash acrostatic inflection in the corresponding finite paradigm From this bleached de-siderative d(h)aacutek-- in any case has been derived in this theory an adjectival d(h)aacutek-u- (RV) lsquoflamingrsquo that is comparable to the -u- derivatives of Vedic desideratives of the cikitsuacute- type mentioned just above that are synchronically perspicuous as such

To be sure Vedic d(h)aacutek-- is habitually parsed as an s-aorist stem32 But as is well known participles to s-aorists are vanishingly rare in Vedic Perhaps even more telling is that an adjective in -u- made to an aorist stem would be a decidedly unusual thing while such derivatives to a desiderative present mdash at least of another inherited kind (namely the i-reduplicated -soe- desiderative) mdash is well established in Vedic itself by the ciacutekitsa- rarr cikitsuacute- type just mentioned (sect3481) However this may be it would seem certain in any case that d(h)aacutek-u- lsquoflamingrsquo is a derivative of a sigmatic verbal stem d(h)aacutek--

34343434823823823823 The analysis of the I-Ir čać-š- reflected in the Ved present caacutee as another -s- present of the unreduplicated athematic type (kwe-s-) thus makes the hypothesis of a -u- adnominal reflecting čaćš-u- lsquolooking viewerrsquo quite economical33 It need only be pointed out in addition that u-stem adjectives are known to make further derivatives in -s- resulting in -u-s- stems of two semantic types descriptively speaking

343434348231823182318231 In a case like Ved āyuacute- lsquolively active agilersquo rarr `yu-- the derivative `yu- meaning lsquolife vitality sprightlinessrsquo is the abstract to its basis34 The same may be ob-served in taacutepu- lsquohotrsquo35 rarr taacutepu- lsquoheat glowrsquo36

348232348232348232348232 Other instances of -u- adjective rarr -u-- derivative produce an output that is descriptively synonymous with the u-stem adjectival basis andor acts as its entirely endo-

30 Confined in RV to the compound raacutesu-jihva- lsquowith pleasing tonguersquo See EWAiaII428 436 with reference to Schindler 197240

31 Jasanoff 2003133 (sect781) 32 Narten 1964134 has a concise discussion of the question 33 The Ved caacuteku- lsquoeyersquo that is descriptively represented by abl caacutekoG (RV 109013) has a very good chance

of being secondary to caacuteku- itself in one way or another See Wackernagel 1930291 but also Debrunner 1954479 with the reference to Tedesco 1945136ndash137

34 The derivational process itself by which an adjective in -u- makes and abstract in -u-s- is either parallel to or modeled on cases of -o- adjective rarr -oes- abstract (eg RV daacuteka- lsquoablersquo rarr RV daacutekas- lsquoability powerrsquo cf Hom+ πηρUς lsquodisabledrsquo rarr Alc τ προς lsquoloss of strengthrsquo) For more on this derivational type see Nussbaum 1998525f

35 Eg taacutepoG hellip divaacuteG (RV 9732) ldquofrom the torrid heavensrdquo 36 Eg niacute māyiacutenas taacutepuā rakaacuteso daha (RV 82314) ldquobrenne hellip mit deiner Glut die zauberischen Dunkelmaumln-

ner niederrdquo (Geldner)

224 Alan J Nussbaum

centric substantivization The same taacutepu- lsquohotrsquo for instance from which taacutepu- lsquoheatrsquo is de-rived also makes a taacutepu- that agrees with taacutepu- in meaning lsquohotrsquo37

An especially notable case of this it might be added is that of Ved jāyuacute- lsquoconqueringrsquo rarr jayuacute- lsquovictoriousrsquo This pair seems to show in the first place that the underlying adjec-tive since there is scarcely any source of analogical ā root vocalism here has an old o-grade (gwo-uacute-) and is thus of the type pol(h1)-uacute- gt Gk πολH- lsquomuchrsquo It also shows however inasmuch as the derivative jayuacute- clearly continues an e-grade in the root (gwe-u-) that the secondary s-stem type reflected here was either derived from an apo-phonically different surface allomorph (gwe-uacute-) of the underlying adjective (and cf pelh1-u- [gt Goth filu lsquomuchrsquo OIr il lsquoidrsquo] beside polh1-u-) or was independent of the ba-sis in its ablaut altogether (like eg Ved pūrEaacute- Lith pigravelnas etc lsquofullrsquo [pdh1-no-] etc vs Ved paacuterīEas- lsquofullnessrsquo [peacutelh1-no-s-])38

348233348233348233348233 The idea of deriving from an I-Ir ldquode-desiderativerdquo čaćš-u- lsquolooking at see-ingrsquo either (1) an abstract čaćšu-š- lsquosightrsquo and therefore lsquoeyersquo or (2) a substantivization čaćšu-š- meaning lsquoviewer eyersquo would therefore encounter no particular obstacle

343434349999 The very frequent Ved caacutekas- lsquoappearance brightness illumination eyersquo If caacuteku- is not likely to be an analogical rearrangement of caacutekas- (cf sect81) still less is there any reason to suppose the opposite development Not only are potentially convincing models lacking but caacutekas- is the far better established member of the pair In addition caacutekas- is not only a substantive with the meanings given but also the stem of a fairly well attested dative infinitive caacutekase to caacutee which perhaps strengthens its case for an independent ex-istence and origin still a bit more

3410341034103410 The final significant nominal formation here is an I-Ir neut -man- stem39 found as such in Iranian (GAv YAv OP) čašman- lsquoeye sightrsquo In form this is a derivative of the I-Ir present stem čakš- of course and not of the root kać-čać- Since the meaning very much suggests a derivative of I-Ir čakš- lsquoseersquo as in Ved caacutee mdash as opposed to the lsquoteachrsquo of YAv cašte mdash it would seem best to conclude that this čakšman- is old enough to pre-date the semantic change of pres čakš- to lsquorevealrsquo and then lsquoteachrsquo in Avestan (sect33324) It would more particularly go all the way back to I-Ir if as often proposed Ved cākmaacute- means lsquoof the eye of Heavenrsquo and is thus a vDddhi derivative (čākšm(n)-aacute-) of this I-Ir -man- stem40

35353535 The previously suggested comparanda beyond Indo-Iranian for τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ in-clude nominal forms from Old Irish and Old Norse as well as a possible Tocharian relative None of them however provides anything beyond a root etymology

351351351351 Irish cucht gen cuchta lsquoform appearance colorrsquo is straightforwardly reconstructable as a u-stem that could ultimately reflect kwo-tu-41 The root o-grade would be of interest of course and will be discussed very briefly below

37 Eg taacutepuā hellip cakriacuteyā (RV 2349) ldquomit gluumlhendem Raderdquo (Geldner) 38 Nussbaum 1998526 The chances that the root vocalism of jayuacute- has simply been adjusted to agree with that

of the related present jaacuteyati lsquoconquersrsquo are lessened of course by the failure of jāyuacute- itself to be similarly re-done

39 See EWAiaI524 (sv caacuteku-) for details and further references 40 See EWAiaI524 (sv caacuteku-) once more for references to literature endorsing this analysis 41 See eg LEIAC-266


352352352352 An exact formal correspondent of Irish cucht appears to be found in ON haacutettr lsquoman-nerrsquo inasmuch as it could continue a Germanic hahtu- This in turn can be traced back to an ultimate kwo-tu- as well The semantics of lsquoappearancersquo vs lsquomannerrsquo would perhaps call for some discussion but parallels are easily found mdash eg ModE mien lsquofacial expres-sionrsquo but also lsquobehaviorrsquo In any case the question is not crucial for present purposes

353353353353 Finally Toch A kapśāntildei B kektsentildee lsquobodyrsquo has been compared as well

3531353135313531 The less complicated history required by this comparison is that of the B form42 which could rest in the end on a hypothetical kwo-ti- lsquoappearancersquo whence kwot-o- lsquoappearingrsquo whence kwoton- lsquowhat appears appearancersquo gt lsquobodyrsquo The A form would have undergone further development conspicuously including a dissimilation of kndashk to kndashp

3532353235323532 For the semantics an especially close analogue is kwrep- lsquoappearrsquo (Gk πρπει lsquois conspicuous resembles is seemlyrsquo) which made a root noun derivative seen both in Ved kDHp- lsquoappearance beautyrsquo and in GAv YAv kəhrp- lsquobodyrsquo mdash not to mention the kwhp-es- continued by Lat corpus lsquobodyrsquo

3533353335333533 If the root vocalism of this highly derived form ultimately comes from that of a hypothetical kwo-ti- that stands at the beginning of this chain of derivatives which is pos-sible even if not assured we would have an indication of a -ti- stem with an o-grade root

354354354354 It is notable that both a -tu- stem and a -ti- stem made from kwe- may show evi-dence of -o- root vocalism which is unusual in nominal stem types that are both generally considered to have shown in the unmarked case the proterokinetic pattern of paradigmatic ablaut mdash a pattern that by definition shows ezero root ablaut And while there are rare in-dications of a -ti- stem type that was ldquooe acrostaticrdquo and thus showed root -o- grade regu-larly (eg mon-ti- gt Lat mōns lsquomountainrsquo cf men- lsquojut loomrsquo Lat im-minēre) these are vanishingly few for -tu- stems It might therefore be preferable to ascribe the apparent o-grade root of these forms to the kwo- directly reflected by Ved -kāśate lsquoappearsrsquo that may well have appeared in the inherited present of this root43

36363636 Judgments have not been unanimous however about whether the τεκ- of Greek τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ τεκmicro5ριον directly continues simple kwe- which would be phonologi-cally unproblematical or should rather be thought to reflect something more complex44

361361361361 The most straightforward account45 to be sure would have it that kwe-mh -mōr -mērio- (of one analysis or another) is the correct reconstruction of these Greek words For the record however it may be briefly noted that there was at one time a rival proposal This idea original in its fully elaborated form with Bechtel46 amounts to a comparison of τκmicroαρ with Ir čašman- (sect3410) under the further assumption that čašman- shows a ldquothorn clusterrdquo and that the expected Greek correspondent ldquoτκτmicroωρrdquo (as Bechtel puts it) simply developed to τκmicroωρ phonologically Invoking a ldquothorn clusterrdquo that is not further motivated however is no longer an option and the tautosyllabic dental plus (labio)velar or

42 See Adams 1999189f for discussion and references to previous proposals 43 Cf notes 3 and 31 above 44 See GEWII866f with further references especially to Bechtel 1914310f 45 Adopted already in IEW638f So also LIV2384 46 Bechtel 1914310f This approach is followed by some older authorities mdash eg Schwyzer 1939326 and

GEWII866f But it is evidently also retained in DELG21061

226 Alan J Nussbaum

(labio)velar plus dental that would motivate it47 is obviously not possible on the basis of a root kwe- that contains no dental

362362362362 It may be pointed out in addition however that τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ τεκmicro5ριον are also not closely associable with Ir čašman- (plus or minus Ved cākmaacute- sect3410) under the cur-rent view that that this I-Ir -man- derivative was made from the present stem čakš- that it-self continues an s-present kwe-s- (sect332) reflected by Ved caacutee lsquoappears beholdsrsquo and YAv cašte lsquoteachesrsquo (sect3321) A kwes-mh should yield Greek daggerτχmicroαρ of course

37373737 Adoption of the reconstruction kwe-mh etc makes these Greek words derivatives of a verbal root meaning as discussed above both lsquolook at beholdrsquo (especially in its active forms) and also lsquolook appearrsquo (not only by overt change of voice to middle but potentially by morphologically unmarked semantic change as well) The meanings lsquomark sign symp-tom indication piece of evidence marker end point demarcationrsquo for τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ and τεκmicro5ριον are obviously fully compatible with this

4444 The morphology of τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ τεκmicro5ριον

41414141 The reconstruction of these three nominal stems as kwe-mh -mōr -mērio- also inevi-tably involves operating with suffixal morphology of the shape -mer-

42424242 A suffixal -mer- furthermore regardless of whether it itself ultimately represents one suffixal morpheme or two (sect47) means that one is dealing in τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ either with a neut r-stem or a neut rn-stem

421421421421 Neither can be confirmed As already noted both τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ are defective nominative-accusatives and τεκmicro5ριον is at best a derivative of a stem allomorph that could be the nom-acc The same can be said of τεκmicroαVροmicroαι There consequently appears to be no derivative at all that is sure to have been made from the original oblique of these words

422422422422 The default assumption nevertheless is that τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ are the defective remnants of one or more heteroclites in -mern- simply because such a type descriptively exists elsewhere even if it is not common Both Hittite and Tocharian have items that syn-chronically seem to inflect as -mern- stems48 Neuters in simple -mer- on the other hand are not easily paralleled anywhere

43434343 But even if heteroclitic -mern- is a less costly assumption than -mer- and even if kwe-mern- is therefore ultimately seen behind τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ and τεκmicro5ριον the situa-tion as observed in Greek remains highly suspect For we seem to find here in a single lan-guage of the family three different ablaut grades of one allomorph of an inflectional suffix (-mern-) that barely exists mdash especially in Greek itself There is consequently every reason to look into the feasibility of sidestepping the necessity of reconstructing them all by ex-plaining one or more of these allomorphs as secondary creations of Greek

44444444 τεκmicro5ριον is especially liable to dimissal as evidence of an old -mer--men- stem be-cause at best it would show -mer- only indirectly There is a good deal more to say how-ever about the possibilitly that τεκmicro5ριον is secondary and not evidence of an inherited -mer- (let alone -mer--men-) at all

47 See again (cf note 8) Schindler 1977 48 See Melchert 198320f Rieken 1999361ff Pinault 2011166ff


441441441441 Frisk49 made a proposal of exactly this kind

4411441144114411 According to his scenario τεκmicro5ριον lsquopiece of evidencersquo was modeled on microαρτHριον lsquotestimonyrsquo (Pi A Thuc+) and is the result more particularly of the following chain of events

1 The precise analogy was microNρτυρ lsquowitnessrsquo microαρτHριον lsquotestimonyrsquo = τκmicroαρ X2 This would have led to τεκmicroNριον but that outcome was disfavored because

-Nριον was a frequent and characteristic formant of hypocoristics a category inwhich τεκmicroNριον lsquosign symptom indication piece of evidence proofrsquo wouldhave been semantically aberrant

3 As a consequence τεκmicroNριον was reshaped to τεκmicro5ριον with a -micro5ρ- copiedfrom the aor τκmicroηρα- of the related verb τεκmicroαVροmicroαι lsquodesignate appoint make adetermination (of)rsquo

4412441244124412 One very strong point in this account to be sure is that microαρτHριον lsquotestimonyrsquo and τεκmicro5ριον lsquopiece of evidencersquo are semantically close enough to make it plausible that one was modeled on the other They are even associated textually mdash eg microαρτHριN τε καW τεκmicro5ρια (A Eum 485)

4413441344134413 But the account also calls forth a number of objections

44131441314413144131 The least complicated of these is a purely formal one τεκmicro5ριον is confined to Attic (A+) and Ionic (Hdt+) But neither of those dialects has microNρτυρ as the nom of lsquowit-nessrsquo Instead they both have microNρτυς (Theogn Hdt+ A Antiphon Ar+) Consequently microNρτυρ microαρτHριον = τκmicroαρ X simply cannot work on the formal level in the very dia-lects in which τεκmicro5ριον needs to be explained

44132441324413244132 There are however also semantic difficulties with the analogy The relationship of microNρτυρ lsquowitnessrsquo to microαρτHριον lsquotestimonyrsquo is not reproduced in τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo vs τεκmicroNριον (gtgt τεκmicro5ριον) lsquopiece of evidencersquo which are almost synonyms This raises thequestion of how the model pair motivated the output pair in the first place and obviously lessens the plausibility of the analogy too

44133441334413344133 Other aspects of Friskrsquos scenario are also discussable but it does not seem worth-while to expand the discussion here to cover these additional difficulties simply for the sake of completeness The unworkability of the analogy suggested by Frisk is plain enough on the basis of what has already been said

442442442442 Is an account of τεκmicro5ριον that makes it a relatively recent analogical innovation but provokes fewer objections possible

4421442144214421 Though a semantic association between microαρτHριον lsquotestimonyrsquo and τεκmicro5ριον lsquopiece of evidencersquo is hardly to be doubted microαρτHριον is not the only term with which τεκmicro5ριον might have an association of that kind

4422442244224422 Another item sharing a semantic neighborhood with τεκmicro5ριον is the semi-substan-tivized neuter θαυmicroNσιον lsquowondrous (thing) wonder (to behold)rsquo In fact these two words demonstrably overlap

49 Frisk 196642ndash46

228 Alan J Nussbaum

44221442214422144221 τεκmicro5ριον lsquosignrsquo for its part has a characteristic use in which it denotes some-thing seen This emerges perfectly clearly from passages like

hellip σHνηθες micromicroα φιλτNτου βροτeνπNντων centρστου τοpoundθrsquo tρν τεκmicro5ριον ldquohellip a familiar sight mdash to see this sign of Orestes dearest of all mortalsrdquo (S Elec 904)

πeς φ5ις tρe micro=ν πτnmicroατος τεκmicro5ριον ldquoWhat do you mean I see the evidence of the fallrdquo (Eur Elec 575)

44222442224422244222 So too does θαυmicroNσιον refer to something strange or even miraculous to see mdash at least very often

τeν γε πUλλrsquo fνθηκε hellip θαυmicroNσια ζωο^σιν fοικUτα φων5εσσιν ldquoMany of them he put there hellip wonders looking like living creatures with voicesrdquo (Hes Th 584)

hellip τρας micro=νθαυmicroNσιον προσιδσθαι) θαpoundmicroα δ= καW παρεUντων Lκοpoundσαι ldquoIt is a wondrous prodigy to see and a wonder also to hear from those presentrdquo (Pi Pyth 26)

το^σι γzρ τοιοHτοισι ταpoundτα θαυmicroNσιN fστιν currenν curren κρεmicroNmicroενον yenδωσιν curren brvbarιπτεUmicroενον curren σα το^σι τοιοHτοισιν sectοικε hellip ldquoThese things are wonders to such people if they see a man either hanging or thrown around or whatever is similar to things like that helliprdquo (Hp de Artic 425)

4423442344234423 If θαυmicroNσιον (historically thaVmat-io-) had any synchronically immediate deriva-tional relationship to its verb θαυmicroNζω lsquowonderrsquo it seems the null hypothesis that it would be to aor θαHmicroασα- (ie a synchronic θαHmicroασα- rarr θαυmicroNσιο-)

44231442314423144231 And it does not seem controversial to acknowledge that θαHmicroασα- beside θαυmicroNσιον does look suggestive when it comes to τκmicroηρα- beside a putatively innovated τεκmicro5ριον

44232442324423244232 Further consideration however makes it look unworkable simply to explain τεκmicro5ριον as created de novo from aor τκmicroηρα- as the output of a proportional analogy with θαυmicroNσιον beside aor θαHmicroασα- as the direct model

442321442321442321442321 An approach of that kind would of course require the following setup

θαHmicroασα- θαυmicroNσιον = τκmicroηρα- X

442322442322442322442322 And a flaw in this putative development that is probably fatal is that it is not the two verbs lsquowonderrsquo and lsquojudgersquo that have a suggestive semantic association but only the nouns lsquoa wonderrsquo and lsquoa signrsquo mdash which can only make it doubtful that these two verbs would really function as the joint ldquoheadsrdquo of an analogical proportion as required in this explanation


4444424424424424 An alternative and promising-looking path toward an account of τεκmicro5ριον how-ever is that this word also makes contact with another morphological class both formally and semantically

44241442414424144241 The class in question is that of the nomina instrumenti (ia) in -τ5ριον Nouns of this type are already found in Homer (θελκτ5ριον lsquocharmrsquo etc) the Hymns (χρηστ5ριον lsquoseat of an oraclersquo) and Hesiod (τz θρεπτ5ρια lsquopayment for fosteragersquo) but become highly productive later mdash and especially in Attic and Ionic

44242442424424244242 The type is generally regarded as having originated from a core of semantically endocentric -ιο- derivatives to agent and instrument nouns in -τ5ρ50

θελκτ5ρ lsquosootherrsquo (HHom) θελκτ5ριον (Hom) ποτ5ρ lsquodrinking cuprsquo (E) ποτ5ριον lsquoidrsquo (Semon A Hdt Ar+)

But as is more or less a prerequisite for productivity it achieved independence It did so in this case as a formant of the relatively lengthy shape -τ5ριο- that derived instrument nouns

44243442434424344243 It will not escape notice naturally that the mysterious -5ριον of τεκmicro5ριον is reminiscent of and even aligns itself with -τ5ριον in a number of ways

(1) It obviously resembles the -τ5ριον of the θελκτ5ριον χρηστ5ριον type in shape (2) It also has the same descriptive function For even though τεκmicro5ριον is not syn-

chronically derivable from a primary verb in Greek it seems fair to say that a word for a lsquosign symptom indication piece of evidence proofrsquo carries an inherently in-strumental sense like lsquothat by which a determination or judgment can be madersquo

(3) Notably τεκmicro5ριον is first attested (A Hecat S Thuc) at precisely the time when the -τ5ριον type was expanding

(4) In addition the -τ5ριον class contains some items that are well within the immedi-ate semantic neighborhood of τεκmicro5ριον itself In this connection κριτ5ριον lsquomeans for judging standardrsquo (Anaxag Emp Pl+) is particularly conspicuous

44244442444424444244 Whatever the further implications of explaining τεκmicro5ριον by way of -τ5ριον may be this explanation does not not lend any real support to the idea of a real τεκmicro5ρ as its basis

(1) Admittedly it is not positively contradicted by anything to suppose that an actual unattested nomen instrumenti τεκmicro5ρ lsquobasis for a determination or judgmentrsquo gave rise to τεκmicro5ριον just as and just when -τ5ρ instruments were being expanded to -τ5ριον

(2) But the idea of τκmicroαρ lsquosignrsquo itself putatively redone as τεκmicro5ριον lsquoindicationrsquo in imitation of something like κριτ5ριον lsquotouchstonersquo actually requires fewer assump-tions than does an expansion of otherwise unknown τεκmicro5ρ on the same model It might even be supposed that when τκmicroαρ a member of a moribund morphological class came up for renewal its replacement by a -τ5ριον derivative was blocked by the absence of anything from which to derive this productive formation mdash there be-ing neither a verb nor even any nominal with a -τ- initial suffix from which to make it directly or analogically so that as a result τκmicroαρ itself was simply reshaped to τεκmicro5ριον

50 See eg Chantraine 193363ff

230 Alan J Nussbaum

443443443443 The consequences of this general approach are these

4431443144314431 It is easy to doubt that τεκmicro5ριον somehow reflects an actual inherited kwe-m^r

4432443244324432 An account of τεκmicro5ριον as derived from the aorist τκmicroηρα- however is easier to demand than to offer if the details of exactly how this happened are to be provided

4433443344334433 If anything a latish inner-Greek expansion of actual τκmicroαρ to τεκmicro5ριον (sect4424) seems the smoothest hypothesis

444444444444 In any case there is evidently no actual unambiguous evidence for a τεκmicro5ρ at all Such a reconstructed item will therefore play no role in what follows51

45454545 This account of τεκmicro5ριον still leaves the question of whether τκmicroαρ or τκmicroωρ might be a secondary creation

451451451451 One thing that may be pointed out immediately in this connection is that a recent inner-Greek origin of τκmicroωρ (Hom Alcm) has apparently never been suggested

452452452452 But Schwyzer52 proposed that post-Hom τκmicroαρ (Hes Pi A Thuc+) lsquodemarca-tion sign goalrsquo is indeed recent and inner-Greek inasmuch as it was back-formed from Hom+ τεκmicroαVροmicroαι lsquodesignate determinersquo the verb to Hom τκmicroωρ lsquosign end point goalrsquo

4521452145214521 This proposal of Schwyzerrsquos however encounters serious obstacles

45211452114521145211 The simplest version of the scenario would need an analogical model of the ob-vious kind

present -αιροε- noun -αρ = τεκmicroαVροmicroαι X

But no such model is available mdash certainly not one that was present in the language in time to produce τκmicroαρ already in Hesiod The only actual pairing of the type -αρ (noun) -αιροε- (verb) in all of Greek seems to be τκmicroαρ τεκmicroαVροmicroαι itself53

45212452124521245212 That does not end the difficulties moreover that Schwyzerrsquos suggestion encoun-ters A scenario in which τκmicroωρ and τεκmicroαVροmicroαι are old while τκmicroαρ is an innovation al-so requires that τεκmicroαVροmicroαι be denominative to τκmicroωρ This itself would be hard to vindi-cate

452121452121452121452121 If we start from the premise that τκmicroωρ was originally a -mōr-mn- stem at least two stumbling blocks are immediately encountered

4521211452121145212114521211 First the expectable pattern for making a denominative verb from a hetero-clite involves using the oblique stem as the derivational basis

51 It is all too obvious that this conclusion completely contradicts the under-examined supposition adopted in Nussbaum 1998536 (sectsect31ndash32)

52 Schwyzer 1939519 53 See Debrunner 1907201ndash203 Hom+ fναVροmicroαι lsquoslay destroyrsquo is denominative to Hom+ τz sectναρα lsquospoilsrsquo

But since no dat of τz sectναρα is found the stem of this pl tantum can be sectναρο- at least as easily as sectναρ- -αρο- stems make denominatives in -αιροε- (cf καθαρUς lsquopurersquo καθαVρω lsquopurifyrsquo etc) The same applies to Cratin+ γαργαVρω lsquoteem swarm withrsquo denominative to pl tantum τz γNργαρα lsquogreat quantitiesrsquo (Alc Com) Hom fλεαVρω lsquotake pity onrsquo may ultimately be denominative to an eleVar lsquopityrsquo but no such noun is attest-ed


-mōr-mn- -m_-oe- (which would result in Gk -microωρ -microαινοε-)

(1) To be sure Hittite does in fact have54 at least some cases of denominatives derived from the nom-acc

-rn- -r-oe- (šēkuršēkun- lsquourinersquo šēkuriye- lsquourinatersquo)

in addition to those made from the oblique

-rn- -n-oe- (uddārudda3n- lsquowordrsquo uddaniye- lsquoconjure speak a charm overrsquo)

(2) But denominatives of heteroclites are derived from the oblique not only in cases like

Ved udakaacutemudn- lsquowaterrsquo udan-yaacute- lsquoirrigate waterrsquo

but especially in Greek itself where this pattern is clear and exceptionless

Hom+ πε^ραρπεVρατ- lsquoend limitrsquo Hom+ πειραVνω lsquobring to an endrsquo Hom+ δωρδατ- lsquowaterrsquo Hom+ GδραVνω lsquowash waterrsquo (if this is a remodeling of GδαVνω) miar (cf Hom microιαρUς lsquo[blood-]stainedrsquo)mian- lsquostainrsquo Hom+ microιαVνω lsquostain sully defilersquoHom κNρηκρ copyατ- (kaacuterākrāh_-) lsquoheadrsquo Hom+ κρumlαVνω (krāh_-oe-) κραVνω lsquoaccomplishrsquo Hsch yenκmicroαρordf νοτVς lsquomoisturersquoyenκmicroατ- () AR+ iκmicroαVνω lsquomoistenrsquo

4521212452121245212124521212 A second and independent problem with τεκmicroαVροmicroαι as denominative to τκmicroωρ is that the rationale is unclear for the notable apophonic contrast -mōr vs -mh- in the assumed

-mōr-mn- -mh-oe- gt τκmicroωρ τεκmicroαVροmicroαι

452122452122452122452122 To avoid these two stumbling blocks it might be supposed that τκmicroωρ reflects not a heteroclite but rather a -mōr-mh- stem in effect This however simply amounts to the reconstruction of a doubtful morphological type (-mer- stem) just to create a source for the -mh- that underlies τεκmicroαVροmicroαι It is therefore obviously not a sustainable hypothesis

452123452123452123452123 A third logical possibility to be mentioned is that of assuming an original -mōr-m_- analogically redone as -mōr-mh- and only then the derivation of -mh-oe- whence τεκmicroαVροmicroαι This approach would encounter two objections

4521231452123145212314521231 It would have to be supported with reasons to accept a paradigmatic leveling in Greek that did away with the inherited heteroclisy while still maintaining the ablaut In practical terms this means producing a parallel or two which would be quite difficult If anything in fact the Greek track record along these lines appears to be one of maintaining heteroclisy (laquoπαρ -ατ- lsquoliverrsquo δωρ -ατ- lsquowaterrsquo possibly οnotς οshyατ- lsquoearrsquo) and even creat-ing secondary heteroclites (κρας κρατ- lsquohornrsquo [Pi+] etc στα^ς σταιτ- lsquodoughrsquo [Hdt Hipp]) while doing away with ablaut mdash or at least inherited ablaut mdash in paradigms where the heteroclisy is leveled out (πpoundρ πregρ- lsquofirersquo ultimately continuing paacuteh2-Vh ph2-Veacuten-55) Even in non-heteroclitics mdash confining ourselves to neuters for present purposes mdash the ab-laut seems to have been decidedly liable to be eliminated The large class of neuter -men- stems of which the unmarked original inflection was evidently proterokinetic -m_ -meacuten-56 seems to have generalized zero-grade -mn- throughout the paradigm on the way to reforming the oblique entirely as something that seems to reflect -m_-t- (-microατ-) mdash at

54 See Oettinger 2002351 353 55 Schindler 1975b10 56 Schindler 1975a263

232 Alan J Nussbaum

least to judge by the isolated nom-acc Plural βλεmicroνα57 lsquomissilesrsquo (Hom+) if as com-monly believed this is the plural to a -men- stem βλεmicroα (as if lt gweacutelh1-m_) to which later βλεmicroνον (A Theocr) is a back-formation For there seems to be an exceptionless pattern in Greek whereby the stem of a neuter nom-acc plural is identical to that of the ob-lique singular58

4521232452123245212324521232 Assuming a -mh-oe- present derived from an analogically refashioned -mōr-mh- stem also simply amounts to inventing an innovated oblique just to derive the de-nominative mdash after which it just happens to disappear This also makes for an unappealing hypothesis

45213452134521345213 Whatever is done about the purely morphological difficulty of τεκmicroαVροmicroαι as a denominative to τκmicroωρ there is another difficulty as well Greek makes remarkably few simple -oe- denominatives at all to nouns of any kind with nom sg in -(C)ωρ or -(C)ων and almost literally none to those that are anything other than adjectives or agentives

(1) For -(C)ωρ nouns there seems to be not a single denominative in expectable -or-oe- gt -οιροε- This applies even to the agents in -τωρ-τορ- which make a denominative of another type in the rare case that there is one at all

brvbar5τωρ lsquopublic speakerrsquo brvbarητορεHω lsquopractice oratoryrsquo (Isoc Pl+)

(2) An adjectival -(C)ων with denominative -(C)αινοε- can be found even if not very often It is possible however to point to

~φρων lsquosenseless foolishrsquo (Hom+) LφραVνω lsquobe foolishrsquo (Hom+) π degων lsquofat (adj)rsquo (Hom+) πmacrαVνω lsquofatten enlargersquo (Pi Semon A Hp+) mdash unless

this is ultimately denominative to π^αρπ degατ- and thus belongs in sect4521211 (2) above

τκτων lsquocraftsmanrsquo (Hom+) τεκταVνοmicroαι lsquomake craftrsquo (Hom S Xen+)

(3) To these may be added the analogous case of

ποιmicro5ν lsquoshepherdrsquo (Hom+) ποιmicroαVνω lsquo(Hom+) lsquoherd tendrsquo

(4) But there are hardly any -αινοε- verbs at all to non-adjectival and non-agentive -(C)ων nouns like Lγnν lsquoprocessionrsquo κλHδων lsquowaversquo θηmicronν lsquoheaprsquo and the like59

57 GEWI216 sv βNλλω Peters 1980244 (note 198) 58 Nussbaum 1986163 59 An illusory case is that of χειmicroαVνω (Pi Hdt+) lsquoafflict with bad weatherrsquo beside χειmicronν -eνος lsquowinter stormrsquo

where the actual derivational basis to judge by the usual pattern is better identified as χε^microα -ατος lsquoidrsquo An-other instance that can reasonably be considered to be not quite probative is microελεδαVνω (Archil Theogn Hdt+) lsquocare forrsquo beside microελεδeνες -nνων (Hom Hymns+) lsquocares sorrowsrsquo (no singular forms until very late) In this case it so happens that a second -αVνω present altogether also ultimately from microλει lsquois a carersquo and also meaning lsquotake thought forrsquo is found as well This is the microελεταVνω attested as pres imv microελεταιντō on an archaic (6c BC) inscription from Argos (Vollgraff 1929208 233f) For its part microελεταVνω can be ac-counted for simply as an example of the sort of -αVνω that is frequently found as a doublet of an -Nω present particularly if denominative mdash cf eg tρmicro5 lsquoonrushrsquo (Hom+) tρmicroNω lsquoset in motionrsquo (Hom+) rarr tρmicroαVνω lsquoturn over ponder set in motionrsquo (Hom+) The present microελεταVνω is easily explained therefore as a well par-alleled kind of extended form of microελετNω (Hes+) lsquotake thought care forrsquo ( microελτη lsquocarersquo) Such a microελεταVνω lsquotake carersquo beside microελεδeνες lsquocaresrsquo may have produced microελεδαVνω


Instead almost all -αινοε- denominatives to n-stems of any kind are to the neuters in -microα

~σθmicroα lsquopantingrsquo Hom LσθmicroαVνω θαpoundmicroα lsquowonderrsquo HHom Anacr θαυmicroαVνω δε^microα lsquofearrsquo Hdt δειmicroαVνω κpoundmicroα lsquowaversquo Hom κυmicroαVνω etc

45214452144521445214 The consequence of these distributional facts is that even if it were to be assumed that an original heteroclite kweacute-mōr-mn- (1) first became defective kweacute-mōr and (2) only then served as the basis for the derivation of a denominative the only viable models for an analogical -mōr rarr -maroe- would have been the derivational class -ōn rarr -anoe- (~φρων LφραVνω) that was just now examined Since these however all had adjectives or agents as the basis they could not have supplied anything but a purely formal mdash and so not very impressive mdash model for an analogical -mōr -maroe- that eventually shows up in τκmicroωρ τεκmicroαVροmicroαι It would merely raise the question of why the model of the ~φρων LφραVνω (ldquode-adnominalrdquo) type though putatively appied to verbal abstract τκmicroωρ was virtually never applied to verbal abstracts like Lγnν etc which were manifestly more for-mally similar to ~φρων etc than was τκmicroωρ

4522452245224522 The final result of these considerations therefore is that the only account of τεκmicroαVροmicroαι not open to serious objection is the obvious one mdash namely that an already de-fective neuter in -mh (τκmicroαρ) made a denominative in -mh-oe- or -maroe- (τεκmicroαVρο-microαι) on the model -m_ rarr -m_-oe- or -manoe- And with reason now to suppose that τεκmicroαVροmicroαι already Homeric presupposes τκmicroαρ it becomes very difficult to maintain that τκmicroαρ is an innovation vis-agrave-vis τκmicroωρ

46464646 Interim Conclusions

444466661111 It is both easy and justifiable to doubt that in τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ τεκmicroαVροmicroαι Greek shows reflexes of three apophonically distinct allomorphs of a single nominal stem (kwe-mh -mōr -mēr-) mdash of a very rare type no less mdash that are furthermore all sup-posed to be really inherited It proved to be possible to account for putative kwe-mēr- moreover in a completely different and reasonable way It is also easy enough on the other hand to be skeptical about whether τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ are likely to continue even two forms of this noun (kwe-mh -mōr) contrasting only in their suffix ablaut on the under-standing that both are inherited Here however it proved unexpectedly challenging to de-velop a hypothesis by which we could explain either one of these forms convincingly and in detail as a Greek creation

462462462462 The remaining task therefore seems to be that of finding the best possible explana-tions of two things The first is the probable existence here of the rare formant -mern- in the first place The other question calling for attention now is the one just raised in the last paragraph mdash the coexistence of τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ in view of the difficulty of accounting for one of them as secondary

47474747 As already mentioned descriptive -mer--men- heteroclitics are a rare type in the IE languages and instances that may be plausibly reconstructed for the proto-language are even rarer60 This encourages a tendency to explain any and all apparent instances of het-eroclites of this class in the individual IE languages as secondary

60 See Melchert 198320f Rieken 1999361ff Pinault 2011166ff

234 Alan J Nussbaum

471471471471 It would be satisfying to be able to show that a given instance of the infrequent neut type in -mer--men- is a rearrangement of something much easier to invoke mdash namely a neut -men- stem And this can perhaps sometimes be done In Greek itself in fact there are very occasional hints that an innovation of that kind was carried out from time to time

(1) It is clear for example that λpoundmicroα lsquowash water offscouringsrsquo (Hom+) acquired a doublet λpoundmicroαρ at a very late date (Maximus [Astrol])

(2) Similarly it could be that micropoundmicroαρordf ασχος φUβος ψUγος (Hsch) has replaced a micropoundmicroα lsquodisgracersquo etc of which an indirect trace could appear in Lmicro copymicroων lsquoblame-lessrsquo (Hom+) But it is just as possible that micropoundmicroαρ Lmicro copymicroων testifies to a -mern- stem in the first place61

(3) An analogous case that would give every indication of a certain antiquity within Greek however is that of ~λειφαρ beside ~λειφα as the nom-acc to ~λειφατ- (Myc a-re-pa-te) lsquofat oil unguentrsquo62 This ~λειφαρ (Hes Th 553 vl Hdt Hp Theoc Opp) always line-final in verse is never metrically guaranteed For its part ~λειφα is certain in Hippon frag 58 is transmitted at A Ag 322 is very fre-quently read in Hp (far more frequently than ~λειφαρ) and is certain in Callim Aet frag 712 Since on general principles it seems unlikely that the language would create something as synchronically unsupported as a noun in -α -ατ- (and not -microα -microατ-) the null hypothesis here is that ~λειφα is original and ~λειφαρ its replacement This in turn would suggest that ~λειφα ultimately reflects h2lebh-m_ with reduction of a h2lebhmn- allomorph to h2lebhn-63 whence ana-logical nom-acc h2lebh_ and the eventual ~λειφα Lλειφατ- Furthermore the hy-pothesis that there was in fact a h2lebhm_ with a h2lebhmn- subject to reduction of its medial -Cmn- sequence (-bhmn-) is strongly supported by LλοιmicroUς lsquoplaster-ingrsquo This is also from LλεVφω lsquoanoint slatherrsquo and therefore appears to have been simplified from ldquooverlongrdquo alommoacute- lt alophmoacute-64 which could itself point to alephmn- if we see here the fairly well established pattern exemplified by suchpairs as θRmicroα lsquotombrsquo (S) lt -m_ beside θωmicroUς lsquoheaprsquo (A+) lt -m(n)oacute- It therefore seems that ~λειφα Lλειφατ- was redone as ~λειφαρ Lλειφατ- on the model of the -αρ -ατ- type which is relatively rare but still more routine than -α -ατ-

This approach however will do little to elucidate the case of τκmicroαρ There is no trace of a -men- stem τκmicroα -microατ- that would hint at this kind of inner-Greek origin for τκmicroαρ And I-Ir čaacutećš-man- lsquosight eyersquo is of no help in establishing it since this nominal gives every sign of having been independently formed at the I-Ir stage from the pres stem čaacuteć-š- (sect362) Nor is it obvious even so why a τκmicroα -microατ- belonging to a perfectly productive morphological class would go over to the -αρ -ατ- type in the first place Still less would an economical solution covering both τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ seem to lie in this direction

472472472472 As an experiment with a by-form of the kind of analysis just outlined however we might point to a very restricted but nevertheless identifiable phenomenon whereby a -Cxer-

61 The situation is complicated by the circumstance that Hsch micropoundmicroαρ beside Lmicro copymicroων would suggest a -men- or -mern- stem to a descriptive microacute- as opposed to the microω- of microemicroαρ lsquoblamersquo (Lyc) that stands beside the far bet-ter attested masc -o- stem microemicroος lsquoblame disgracersquo this last showing that even a noun in -microο- could be ex-panded to -microαρ at least as a poetic artifice

62 Cf Nussbaum 198652 (note 10) 54 (notes 17 18) 63 See Nussbaum 2010 with further references 64 Cf eg micromicroα lsquoeyersquo lt opma (as if) lt h3okwm_


-Cxen- heteroclite stands beside an adnominal in -Cxo- and acts as a substantivization andor abstract to the -Cxo- formation

1 A tolerably clear case is that of some familiar nominals to h2arh3- lsquoplowrsquo A pri-mary -Vo- derivative of the form h2arh3-Vo- originally adjectival and presumablyof the type Ved pak-vaacute- lsquoripe cookedrsquo Lat ignāvos lsquounconscientious lazyrsquo (lt-gnōVo- lt -7noh3-Vo- or -7_h3-Vo-) in the first instance is reflected by Latarvos lsquoplowed arablersquo (Pl Truc 149+) This was substantivized both to Lat arvomlsquofieldrsquo and to OLat arva Umb arvaarvaarvaarva65656565 lsquoidrsquo Beside this h2arh3Vo- however areclear traces of a heteroclitic h2arh3Vh -Ven- in OIr arbor arbae lsquograinrsquo besideMyc a-ro-u-ra Hom+ ~ρουρα (lt h2arh3Vr-ih2

66) lsquofield (arable) landrsquo and Armharawownkc (lt h2arh3Von-) lsquoplanting seed fieldrsquo67 It may be considered in otherwords whether there might not have been a rather ancient derivational process thatlooked like

h2arh3-Vo- lsquoplowed tilled cultivatedrsquo rarr h2arh3-Vh -Ven- lsquotillage68 crops growingon tilled landrsquo

2 The case for the derived character of a second inherited -Vh-Ven- stem mdash namelypihx-Vh-Veacuten- lsquofatrsquo mdash is more difficult to make because of the lack of absolutelyclear evidence of a p(oe)ihxVo- from which it could have been derived It can atleast be said however that the maximally economical account of Gk π^αρ lsquofatrsquo(shown to be a defective remnant of an rn-stem by πVων πVειρα = Ved povan- povarī-) beside I-Ir pīVas- (Ved povas- Av pīuuah-)69 would make them bothderivatives of a pihxVo- lsquofat (adj)rsquo This could be done as follows

pihx-Vo- lsquofat (adj)rsquo rarr pihx-Vh -Ven- lsquofat (noun)rsquo like h2arh3-Vo- lsquotilledrsquo rarrh2arh3-Vh -Ven- lsquotillagersquo

pihxVo- lsquofat (adj)rsquo rarr pihxVo-s- lsquofat (noun)rsquo like any number of examples of themore common type70 στεινUς στενUς lsquonarrowrsquo (Hdt A+) rarr τ στε^νος lsquotight spotrsquo (Hom+) RV daacuteka- lsquoablersquo rarr RV daacutekas- lsquoability powerrsquo OCS lacuteutŭ lsquoterriblersquo rarr lacuteuto -ese lsquooutragersquo

And although opinions have differed it is in the end possible that a -Vo- derivative of p(oe)ihx- is to be seen in the po(hx)-Vo- implied by the further -h2- derivative po(hx)Va-h2 that surfaces not only as Lith piacuteeva lsquomeadowrsquo but also as Gk ποVuml ποVη71 lsquograss grass-covered meadowrsquo

65 See most recently Weiss 201099 (note 3) 380 66 See Peters 1980123 134 (note 82) 143ff 180 198ff 203 67 See Nussbaum 198621 (note 3) 33 203 Widmer 200445ndash48 68 For tillage in the sense lsquocrops growing on tilled landrsquo see OED sv tillage (sect2) 69 Needless to say an s-stem pīVas- of clearly I-Ir date cannot be explained as a secondary remodeling of an

r-stem (type Ved pdhar gtgt pdhas- lsquoudderrsquo) facilitated by the neutralization of inherited final -r and -s in a number of environments in Indic alone

70 See Nussbaum 1998525f So also Weiss 1993162 71 The failure of the root-final laryngeal to produce a syllabic reflex in this environment is expectable or even

overdetermined See eg Nussbaum 1997 passim esp 200 with further references

236 Alan J Nussbaum

fν ποV lsquoin a field of grassrsquo (σ 368) τρενrsquo ~νθεα ποVης lsquotender blooms of the grassy meadrsquo (ι 449) κατrsquo ~νθεα microαλθακz ποVης lsquothrough the soft blooms of the grass (land)rsquo (H xxx 15) νεοθηλα ποVην lsquothe newly bloomed grass (land)rsquo (Σ 347)

The semantics of this word for a flourishing and burgeoning piece of land are in near convergence with the meaning lsquofertile flourishingrsquo that πVων πVειρα bears when it is applied to land

νειν microαλακsν πVειραν ~ρουραν lsquosoft fallow-land and flourishing farmlandrsquo (Σ 541) πVονες LγροV lsquofertile fieldsrsquo (Ψ 832) πιUτατον πεδVον lsquoa most fertile plainrsquo (Ι 573) etc

It is therefore not unreasonable to suppose that they are closely related etymologi-cally and even morphologically in the way suggested just above mdash even if a com-pelling account of the root o-grade of PIE po(hx)Vah2- is still outstanding

3 An adjectival pro-Vo- lsquo(going) forth forthcomingrsquo that was evidently derived fromthe proto-preverb-preposition pro is reflected with only trivial semantic changein ON fraacuter lsquofastrsquo or OHG frō lsquohappyrsquo But a further derivative of this pro-Vo- in aretained spatial sense like lsquoforth forwardrsquo would appear to be a pro-Vh lsquofrontrsquofrom which in turn comes the Greek proVh-a3- (gt proVar-a3-) that is continuedby πρsup1ρα lsquoforepart of a ship prowrsquo (Hom+)

4 A set of forms reminiscent of the situation just observed is made up of YAvsnāuuarə lsquosinewrsquo (snāuuarƽbāzura lsquosinew-armedrsquo) beside Ved sn`van- (n) lsquosin-ewrsquo which is generally regarded mdash together with derivatives like Gk νεpoundροννευρN lsquosinew bowstringrsquo and other more ambiguous comparanda mdash as pointing toan inherited sneh1-Vh -Ven- or the like72 Beside this however is found the YAv(Yt 10128) material adjective snāuuiia- lsquomade of sinewrsquo for which the Transpo-nat would be sneh1Vio- It is of course impossible to say for sure whether such asneh1Vio- would have been derived from a sneh1Vo- or simply a sneh1u- But itdoes at least reinforce the impression that heteroclitic suffixation in -h -en- wasvery occasionally denominal

5 To the extent that it is defensible and even useful to adopt the view that a clearlyverbal adjective like h2arh3-Vo- lsquoplowed tilledrsquo is the basis of a derived substanti-val h2arh3-Vh -Ven- lsquotillagersquo it becomes thinkable to investigate the possibilitythat the same presumably archaic and therefore rarely seen derivational process wasonce liable to take other o-stem verbal adjectives as its starting point Amongo-stem verbal adjectives none is more conspicuous of course than the -toacute- ldquoparti-ciplerdquo It is therefore striking that what is virtually the lone example of a plausiblyinherited -th -ten- stem noun is made from the same root that provides one of themost securely reconstructible -toacute- participles The root in question is h1e- lsquogorsquowith both reflexes of an evident h1i-to- lsquogonersquo in a number of branches mdash egVed (ud)-itaacute- lsquorisenrsquo etc YAv (duž)-ita- lsquohard to go torsquo etc Gk (ordmmicroαξ)ιτUςlsquostreetrsquo and others mdash as well as an apparent h1i-th -ten- continued by Lat iteritiner- lsquoroad journeyrsquo beside a probable h1i-tōr in Toch A ytār (fem) B ytārye

72 See EWAiaII770f for the forms and further references Some also in EDG sv νευρN DELG2 sv νεpoundρον EDL sv nervus See GEW sv νευρN and LEW sv nervus for older literature


(fem) lsquoroadrsquo To these Hitt itar lsquoroadrsquo (hapax) is clearly to be added73 We may in short see here the reflexes of a derivational process of the following kind

h1i-to- lsquogonersquo rarr h1i-th -ten- lsquotravelrsquo (rarr h1i-tōr lsquoa trip course roadrsquo see sect152below)

Although the rarity of derivatives of the type considered here for h2arh3-Vh -Ven- lsquotillagersquo and h1i-th -ten- h1i-tōr lsquocourse way roadrsquo suggests antiquity it also seems that the process lasted as a very marginal phenomenon here and there One example will have to suffice for present purposes A frequently encountered view is that Ved śpna- (neut) lsquoemptiness lackrsquo plus GAv a-sūna- lsquowithout any lack wealthyrsquo (pointing to a uhx-no- lsquoemptyrsquo) beside YAv sūra- lsquoholersquo (indicating a uhx-ro- lsquoemptyrsquo) suggest an rn-stem to eVhx- lsquoswell up inflate be hollowrsquo74

mdash or in other words that they should be analyzed as uhxr-o- and uhxn-o- This is quite unsure since both -ro- and -no- are individually and independently verifi-able formants of ldquoCaland systemrdquo adjectives that are by no means analyzable by de-fault as rn-stem derivatives It is doubtful for example that an rn-stem would be reconstructed any longer on the basis of a pair like OIr laacuter lsquosurface groundrsquo and OE flōr lsquogroundrsquo (plah2-ro-) beside Lat plānus lsquoflatrsquo and Lith ploacutenas lsquoidrsquo (plah2-no-) In the case of the lexical family of eVhx- however there is also Gk τ κHαρ lsquohole eye of a needle ear holersquo (Hp Poll) This should most immediately reflect uhx-h from the same root as Ved śpna- lsquoemptinessrsquo and Av sūra- lsquoholersquo And that in turn implies an original rn-stem since a neuter r-stem is a more diffi-cult assumption We therefore seem to have some evidence of an rn-stem to eVhx- whether or not the uhxro- and uhxno- reflexes are considered to add toit Such an rn-stem however can itself be accounted for as a derivative of the kind now in question

oVhx-o- lsquohollowrsquo (κUοιordf τz χNσmicroατα τRς γRς καW τz κοιλnmicroατα [Hsch] Lat cavuslsquoconcave hollowrsquo) rarr (oe)uhx-rn- lsquoconcavity holersquo (κHαρ)

This sort of putative secondary heteroclite if it is to be assumed at all would quali-fy as a PIE type because of h2arh3-Vh -Ven- lsquotillagersquo h1i-th -ten- lsquotravelrsquo h1i-tōr lsquojourney roadrsquo and pihx-Vh -Ven- lsquofatrsquo It would thus allow explanationsof τκmicroαρ beside τκmicroωρ that could start from whatever theory is favored for eg Lat iter itin(er)- (h1i-th -ten-) beside Toch A ytār B ytārye (h1i-tōr) And this in turn would permit us to take advantage at some level of the explanatory theo-ries available for the formally parallel and more familiar pairs of the type paacuteh2-Vh -Ven- (Hitt pakkur pakwen-) lsquofirersquo beside paacuteh2-Vōr ph2u-n- (TochB pūwar) Voacuted-h -n- (Hitt wātar etc) lsquowaterrsquo beside Veacuted-ōr -n- (Gk δωρ etc) and quite a few others Only the semantic dimension of the question of τκmicroωρ in addition to τκmicroαρ would have to be specially addressed

It hardly needs saying however that evidence for a kwem(n)o- from which kweacutemh andor kwemōr could theoretically have been derived as secondary het-eroclites of the kind indicated here is just as absent as was a τκmicroα of which

73 See Rieken 1999374ndash377 NIL220 222 for more forms and 224f for some discussion and many further ref-erences

74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum

τκmicroαρ could theoretically (even if not very plausibly) be a purely Greek rearrange-ment

473473473473 The result of considering the possibilities just discussed for τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ is therefore a negative one It is that even if it would be appealing to account for these two Greek examples of an infrequent morphological type as secondary remodellings mdash whether old ones or more recent ones mdash of something else positive grounds for dealing with them in that way are lacking At least for the moment it consequently seems best to take them at face value

5555 If both τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ go back as far as the eye can see why do they exist side byside in the first place

51515151 This question obviously reduces to that of why Greek should have two descriptively distinct lexical items that not only share the same root but also show the same suffix in the two forms -microαρ and -microωρ

52525252 As relexes of what would be mechanically reconstructed as -mh vs -mōr they show the apophonic-morphological contrast familiar from much-discussed pairs like the follow-ing

neut noun 1 neut noun 2 -m_ (νοmicroα etc) lsquonamersquo -mō(n) (Goth namo) lsquonamersquo

neut sing neut plural -m_ (Lat nōmen etc) lsquonamersquo -mō(n) (Ved n`ma3) lsquonamesrsquo

-h (Hitt karšarkaršan-) lsquoheadrsquo -ōr (karšār) lsquoheadsrsquo

-os (Av manō) lsquomindrsquo -ōs (mans) lsquomindsrsquo

neut noun non-neut endo -m_ (τρmicroα) lsquoboundaryrsquo -mō(n) (τρmicroων) lsquoboundaryrsquo

(neut) noun non-neut exo -m_ noun (γνemicroα lsquoopinionrsquo) -mō(n) (γνnmicroων) lsquojudgersquo

(neut) noun possess adj -Vh-Veacuten- (π^αρ) lsquofatrsquo (noun) -Vō(n) (π degων Ved povān-) lsquofatrsquo adj

neut adj non-neut adj meacute7-h2 (Ved maacutehi Gk microγα) meacute7-oh2- (Ved mah`-)

noun cpd 2nd member -Vh-Veacuten- (πε^ραρ lsquoend limitrsquo) -Vō(n) (LπεVρων lsquolimitlessrsquo)

53535353 In what has become the usual terminology that is to say τκmicroαρ and τκmicroωρ look like a neuter noun and its ldquointernal derivativerdquo75

531531531531 The term denotes a derivative made through the alteration of its pattern of inflectional accent and ablaut and not by addition of overt morphology

532532532532 More particularly the core pattern of changes76 (not actually exemplified in sect52) is

Acrostatic [ldquoStrongrdquo R(ôacute) S(t) D(t) | ldquoWeakrdquo R(eacute) S(t) D(t)] rarr Proterokinetic [ldquoStrongrdquo R(eacute) S(t) D(t) | ldquoWeakrdquo R(t) S(eacute) D(t)]

rarr Hysterokinetic [ldquoStrongrdquo R(t) S(eacute) D(t) | ldquoWeakrdquo R(t) S(t) D(eacute)]

The theory in other words posits derivational changes that amount to the ldquopromotionrdquo of the weak stem shape of the basis to strong stem of the derivative77

75 See Schindler 1975c63 Watkins 1982261f Nussbaum 1986118ndash121 187ndash191 242ndash244 Widmer 1997 124f Nussbaum 1998147ndash152 Schaffner 200177 note 25 Widmer 200428ndash32

76 The full pattern of accent and ablaut switches for derivational purposes mdash the ldquoderivational chainrdquo mdash was seen and described already in the mid-1970rsquos by the late Jochem Schindler See Nussbaum 1998147 (notes 161 162) See Widmer 200462ff for examples of these patterns


Acrostatic Proterokinetic Hysterokinetic ldquoStrongrdquo R(ôacute) S(t) D(t) R(eacute) S(t) D(t) R(t) S(eacute) D(t) ldquoWeakrdquo R(eacute) S(t) D(t) R(t) S(eacute) D(t) R(t) S(t) D(eacute)

533533533533 More important for present purposes however are the derivational schemes descrip-tively observable in a substantial number of cases (as in all of the examples given in sect52 above) that patently do not go according to the same system

Acrostatic rarr Amphikinetic [ldquoStrongrdquo R(eacute) S(o) D(t) | ldquoWeakrdquo R(t) S(t) D(eacute)]

Proterokinetic rarr Amphikinetic [ldquoStrongrdquo R(eacute) S(o) D(t) | ldquoWeakrdquo R(t) S(t) D(eacute)]

534534534534 And clearly observable though largely restricted to a single derivational category (simplex noun rarr second member of a possessive compound) is the familiar pattern

Hysterokinetic rarr Amphikinetic πατ5ρ lsquofatherrsquo rarr L-πNτωρ lsquofatherlessrsquo (S+) etc

This third subdivision of the phenomenon like the first is not of direct relevance here

54545454 The question put as the subject of sect5 in other words may be answered in a way that is neither novel nor very surprising The path of least resistance would seem to be in its es-sentials that that τκmicroωρ is some kind of ldquointernal derivativerdquo of τκmicroαρ

6666 What follows if τκmicroωρ is indeed an ldquointernal derivativerdquo of τκmicroαρ

61616161 In the view adopted here internal derivatives of all types were ultimately one thing

Basis X rarr Derivative Y with ldquopossessiverdquoldquopossessiverdquoldquopossessiverdquoldquopossessiverdquo meaning (lsquowith having containing Xrsquo)78

62626262 And in fact almost all the types of internal derivatives just exemplified can be ana-lyzed as possessives

621621621621 Possessive function of the most straightforward kind is seen in cases of the type

Noun (neut or not) rarr possessive adjective acro kroacutet-u-kreacutet-u- lsquopowerrsquo (Ved kraacutetu-kraacutetv- Av xratu-inst xratū)

rarr protero kreacutet-u-kht-eacuteV- lsquostrongrsquo (Hom κρατHς) protero teacuteVhx-s lsquostrengthrsquo (Av tƽuuiš)

rarr hystero -^s lsquostrongrsquo (Ved tav`s tavaacutesam lsquostrongrsquo)

77 This ldquopromotionrdquo of the weak stem of the basis to strong stem of the derivative is especially clearly illustrated by some derivatives of rn-stems where the derivative becomes a ldquohomocliticrdquo n-stem Cf eg pihx-Vh -Ven- lsquofat (noun)rsquo (π^αρ) rarr pihx-Vō(n) lsquofat (adj)rsquo (π degων Ved povān-) or Ved pdhar pdhn- lsquoudderrsquo rarr rapśaacuted-ūdhan- lsquowith swollen udder(s)rsquo When the internal derivative of an rn-stem has -(oe)r as its ldquostrongrdquo stem formant mdash either as a neut rn-stem itself (Voacuted-h Veacuted-n- [Hitt wātar weten-] rarr neut Veacutedōr ud-n- [Gk δωρ δατ-] lsquowaterrsquo) or as a non-neut r-stem throughout (h1eacute-th h1i-teacuten- [Lat iter itin(er)-] rarr fem h1eacute-tōr h1i-tr- [Toch A ytār]) lsquoroadrsquo sect16212 below) mdash the pattern observed in the derivative can be ex-plained as analogical (already in PIE) to that of non-heteroclites where a neut -men- stem basis eg natural-ly made neut internal derivatives that were also -men- stems (-m_ [Ved n`ma etc lsquonamersquo] rarr neut -mō(n) [Goth namo]) and made non-neut internal derivatives that were too (-m_ [Gk τρmicroα Lat termen etc lsquoboundaryrsquo] rarr masc -mō(n) [Gk τρmicroων])

78 In partial agreement with Widmer 200438ff

240 Alan J Nussbaum

protero pihx-Vh-Ven- lsquofat (noun)rsquo (π^αρ) rarr amphi pihx-Vō(n) (π degων Ved povān-) lsquofat lsquo(adj)

protero -m_ (Gk microνRmicroα lsquoremembrancersquo) rarr amphi -mō(n) (Gk microν5microων) lsquomindfulrsquo

622622622622 But possessive meaning is also easily squared with agentives

protero -m_ (Ved braacutehma lsquoprayerrsquo Gk γνemicroα lsquojudgmentrsquo) rarr amphi -mō(n) (Ved brahm` lsquopriestrsquo Gk γνnmicroων lsquoexpertrsquo)

and so presumably also

Lat sēmen lsquoseedrsquo rarr Sēmō lsquo(divine name)rsquo lt lsquoinseminatorrsquo vel sim

623623623623 A possessive derived from a basis denoting some countable variety of concretum can function as a ldquocollectiverdquo in the traditional and familiar sense of the term mdash a lexical item denoting a collection of the countable things

6231623162316231 This can be exemplified by any number of external derivational types with posses-sive semantics

Lat arbōs lsquotreersquo (-o3s-) rarr arbustum lsquocopse plantationrsquo (-os- plus possessive -to-) Ved aacuteśva- lsquohorsersquo goacute- lsquocowrsquo rarr aacuteśvāvat goacutemat lsquowealth in horses wealth in cattlersquo (aacuteśva- goacute-

plus possessive -vant--mant-)

6232623262326232 These correspond functionally to the modern collective types

Engl citizen rarr citizenry Gmn Berg rarr Gebirge Rippe rarr Gerippe (countable collectives) Engl plume rarr plumage Engl crock rarr crockery Gmn Feder rarr Gefieder (non-countable col-

lectives)

6233623362336233 In this scheme possessive internal derivatives functioning as collectives of count-able concreta would be the precise source of the familiar internally derived neut plurals of the type (as above)

-m_ (Lat nōmen etc) lsquonamersquo rarr -mō(n) (Ved n`ma3) lsquonamesrsquo -h (Hitt karšarkaršan-) lsquoheadrsquo rarr -ōr (karšār) lsquoheadsrsquo -os (Av manō) lsquomindrsquo rarr -ōs (mans) lsquomindsrsquo

624624624624 For purposes of facilitating a later section of the presentation (sect12) it is convenient to point out here that a possessive derived not from a word for something countable but rather from a mass noun can denote a bounded but internally unsubdivided sample of the mass This may be called a ldquodelibativerdquo ( Lat delibare lsquotake a specimen or samplersquo)79

6241624162416241 Modern derivatives with ldquodelibativerdquo semantics would include items like

Engl grain rarr grainage lsquoa crop of grainrsquo Gmn Wasser lsquowaterrsquo rarr Gewaumlsser lsquobody stretch of waterrsquo

6242624262426242 A few examples of delibatives from the older IE languages are

79 This theory of collective function for possessive derivatives of count nouns vs ldquodelibativerdquo function for pos-sessive derivatives of mass nouns (along with a brief consideration of the idea that ordinary collectives of count nouns can themselves be reconceptualized as delibatives) is presented in more detail in Nussbaum 2013 (forthcoming) It is intended among other things as a way of dealing with some of the problems discussed relatively recently in eg Irslinger 20099ndash16


Ved aacutevas lsquonourishmentrsquo rarr avasaacutem lsquoonersquos daily nourishmentrsquo (aacutevas- plus possessive -aacute-) Ved vaacutesu lsquopropertyrsquo rarr vaacutesumat lsquo(onersquos) propertyrsquo (vaacutesu- plus possessive -mant-) Gk πpoundρ πregρ- lsquofirersquo rarr πregρ-U- πregρN πregρο^ς lsquowatchfirersquo (πregρ- plus possessive -U-) Lat strāmen lsquostrawrsquo (-m_) rarr strāmentum lsquoa bundle of strawrsquo (-m_ plus possessive -to- cf

sect172)

6243624362436243 An example of a delibative by way of PIE derivational -ih2-aacuteh2- in possessive function (a derivational-semantic function of -ih2-aacuteh2- that is seen especially clearly in pihx-Vh lsquofat [noun]rsquo rarr pihxVeacuter-ih2 lsquofat [adj]rsquo) is provided by a case like

pik- lsquopitchrsquo (Lat pix pic-) rarr pik-ih2 lsquopitchrsquo (Gk πVσσα)

And an additional diachronic aspect of the semantics of delibative derivatives of this kind is suggested by this case as well

62431624316243162431 By the proposed theory the very most original derived semantics would have been

lsquopitchrsquo (basis) rarr lsquoa particular mass quantity of pitchrsquo (delibative derivative via a possessive type)

62432624326243262432 It would therefore be explicitly proposed that pik-ih2 lsquosome pitchrsquo became the word for the substance itself by a simple semantic change in Greek The pragmatics allow-ing this are easy to imagine

62433624336243362433 If as a next step internal derivatives are essentially possessive derivatives and if delibatives are themselves possessive derivatives it was obviously possible to make deliba-tives by internal derivation And it therefore seems natural to suppose that internally de-rived singulars that denote mass nouns have a history as a rule in which something that was originally a delibative by internal derivation is what appears as the unmarked word for a substance mdash ie

h1^sh2-h-n- (Gk frac14αρ Hitt ēšn-) lsquobloodrsquo rarr h1eacutesh2-ōr-n- (Toch A ysār B yasar Hitt iškan-)paacuteh2-Vh-Veacuten- (Hitt pakkur pakwen-) lsquofirersquo rarr paacuteh2-Vōrph2u-n- (Toch B pūwar cf Goth

fon) soacutek-h (Hitt šakkar) lsquoexcrementrsquo rarr seacutekōrskn- (σκeρ)Voacuted-h (Hitt wātar) lsquowaterrsquo rarr Veacutedōrudn- (δωρ Umb uturuturuturutur)

It would only be necessary to assume again (sect6243) that delibatives which in the very first instance had meanings like lsquoa mass of bloodrsquo lsquoa firersquo lsquoa quantity of excrementrsquo lsquoa body stretch mass of waterrsquo etc sometimes took over as basic mass nouns in one IE lan-guage or another80

6244624462446244 An additional point mdash this one formal mdash might be in place here as well Although -oacute- stem possessive-adnominal derivatives mdash like other adnominals of all sorts mdash may of course be substantivized without benefit of any morphology marking them explicitly as having become nouns they are also eligible for overt substantivization with -h2- and ap-

80 The use of the morphology that characterizes (collective and delibative) internal derivatives to make real plu-rals not only to count nouns (type Hitt karšarkaršan- lsquoheadrsquo karšār lsquoheadsrsquo etc as above) mdash where they are are easy to explain as originally simple collective derivatives mdash but also to mass nouns (type Hitt wātar lsquowaterrsquo widār lsquowatersrsquo) would have to represent a separate later (but still presumably PIE) deployment of this morphology for strictly inflectional and no longer derivational purposes Some discussion of this will be found in Nussbaum 2013 (forthcoming)

242 Alan J Nussbaum

pear as -a-h2 if the suffix is actually applied This is as true of possessives functioning as delibatives as it is of any other possessive An example (cf sect6242) is

ph2-ur- (Gk πregρ-) lsquofirersquorarr possessive ph2ur-oacute- (delibative by substantivization without suffix gt τz πυρN lsquowatchfirersquo)

rarr overtly substantivized ph2uraacute-h2 (πregρ copyπregρ5) gt delibative lsquoa burning mass pyrersquo

And a second perfectly parallel example is

Voacuted-hVeacuted-n- lsquowaterrsquo (rarr possessive udn-oacute-) rarr substantive udna-h2 lsquoa mass of water waversquogt Lat unda

6245624562456245 It could also be suggested along the way here that operating with possessive deriva-tives that function as delibatives may solve an old problem or two elsewhere As an exam-ple of what this sort of analysis can yield it might be instructive to look at the problem of the famously contrasing accents of Ved aacutejra- and Gk LγρUς as reflexes of PIE h2a7ro- lsquoopen land fieldrsquo

62451624516245162451 This central piece of IE vocabulary is most easily understood81 as a ro-stem de-verbative noun to h2a7 lsquodriversquo82 that has been semantically concretized

1 It is true that most of the clearest instances of ro-stems of this type and with this de-velopment are neuter (eg doacuteh3 lsquogiversquo rarr doacuteh3-ro- gt δeρον etc lsquogiftrsquo) but mas-culine verbal nominals with such a stem formant can nevertheless be found hereand there For example the masc Ved vaacutejra- lsquoweapon thunderboltrsquo ( Gk PN(Μελ)-αγρος) has been said to reflect a PIE Vaacute7-ro- to the Va7- of Hitt wāk-ilsquobitesrsquo and Gk ~γνυmicroι lsquosmashrsquo83

2 For the semantic concretization proposed quite a good parallel is provided by theMod Eng verb drive with its verbal abstract drive which can mean not only lsquoact ofdrivingrsquo and lsquocarriage roadrsquo or lsquoprivate road leading to a housersquo but also lsquotract overwhich game is drivenrsquo This last provides a satisfactory parallel for PIE h2a7ro- asa deverbative to h2a7 lsquodriversquo mdash especially on the understanding that in principlethere would be nothing in the way of supposing that the PIE word denoted a bitmore broadly something like lsquotract over which either game or herd animals aredrivenrsquo The development from lsquotract of open land over which animals are drivenrsquoto lsquoopen landrsquo more generally seems trivial

3 With regard to the accent a barytone h2aacute7-ro- in conformity with doacuteh3-ro- andVaacute7-ro- in no 1 just above would seem the null hypothesis

4 This all amounts then to a PIE barytone verbal abstract h2aacute7ro- that had the con-cretized meaning lsquoopen landrsquo (cf Eng lsquodriversquo) and thus effectively counted orcould count as a mass noun

81 See mdash with eg LEW sv ager mdash the older literature proposing this long-standing basic etymology See also now Anttila 2000133f who argues for it in great detail It is also the view of the most conspicuous modern etymological dictionaries (DELG2 EDG EDL) GEW is less committal and DELL offers no root etymology for Lat ager etc at all

82 This analysis offers the advantage of removing the word from the class of cases in which oxytonesis vs bary-tonesis reflects substantivizing accent retraction in what is at bottom an oxytone adjective (eg Ved vīraacute- lsquostrongrsquo gt lsquoman herorsquo vs Lith vyacuteras m (1) lsquomanrsquo see Schaffner 2001328ff especially 332)

83 See EWAiaII492 with many further references especially to Watkins 1986323ff 327f


62452624526245262452 If so it becomes possible to specify and thus explain the contrast between h2aacute7ro- lsquoopen landrsquo and h2a7roacute- lsquoopen landrsquo by way of a derivational relationship be-tween them

624521624521624521624521 More particularly the account could operate with h2aacute7ro- as the basis and h2a7roacute- as a specifically possessive derivative supplying as so often when the basis is amass noun a delibative

h2aacute7ro- lsquoopen land Landrsquo (Ved aacutejra-)rarr possessive-delibative h2a7roacute- lsquopiece of open land Gelaumlndersquo (Gk LγρUς)

624522624522624522624522 The thing that needs justification here of course is the proposition that a bary-tone o-stem substantive could form a possessive derivative in PIE by what descriptively looks like a shift to oxytonesis mdash ie by a process of the morphological type R(Eacute)-o- rarr R(E)-oacute- It can at least be said that a phenomenon of precisely that character can be ob-served in more than one branch

1 First there are a number of isolated instances showing the process applied to itemswith no special chance of having been inherited84

LσφUδελος lsquoasphodelrsquo (Hes+) rarr LσφοδελUς (λειmicronν) lsquoasphodel-filled (mead)rsquo (Hom)

frac12βος lsquohumprsquo (Arist) rarr GβUς lsquohump-backedrsquo (Hp Theoc) RV kaacuterṇa- lsquoearrsquo rarr AV karṇaacute- lsquoauritusrsquo ie lsquobig-earedrsquoRV sr`ma- lsquodisabilityrsquo rarr srāmaacute- lsquodisabled lamersquo

2 But also to be noted are some cases indicating already at this stage of the discussion(see sect7 below) that the well known barytone o-stem verbal abstracts of the ldquoτUmicroοςtyperdquo could also make oxytone possessive derivatives

Ved bhoacutega- lsquoenjoymentrsquo bhojaacute- lsquohaving enjoymentrsquo = lsquohaving enjoyment on offer offering enjoymentrsquo

66663333 All of this already indicates that some possessive derivational origin would also be at-tractive for a type mdash formally identical to τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ mdash that has not yet been dis-cussed here but is illustrated by

Hom+ τρmicroα lsquoboundary endrsquo Lat termen lsquoboundary stonersquo (-m_) rarr A+ τρmicroων lsquoboundary endrsquo mdash and cf Ven termonios lsquoterminalesrsquo (also pointing to a termō-mon-)

64646464 Nevertheless a clearer functional andor semantic understanding of the ldquopossessiverdquo-looking derivational process seen in τρmicroα termen rarr τρmicroων if that is our theory is plain-ly needed This is especially so for present purposes since as just noted

teacuter(h2)-m_ lsquoboundary endrsquo rarr teacuter(h2)-mō(n) lsquoboundaryrsquo

is so obviously both formally parallel (except in gender) and semantically analogous to

kweacute-mh (τκmicroαρ) lsquosign endrsquo rarr kweacute-mōr (τκmicroωρ) lsquodemarcation sign endrsquo

7777 To decide how best to analyze the semantics of τρmicroα termen τρmicroων and to see whatguidance that might give about τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ it would be useful to study the semantics

84 See also Schaffner 2001338

244 Alan J Nussbaum

of derivational processes more generally that fall under a broad description that can be schematized as

Verbal abstractnomen actionis rarr possessive derivative

The reason for striking out in this direction of course is that neut -men- stems like teacuter(h2)-m_ though frequently concretized were essentially a type of verbal abstract

71717171 We have already noted that one thing that can be produced by the derivation of a pos-sessive from a nomen actionis is an agentive

711711711711 Examples already given are

Ved braacutehma lsquoprayerrsquo rarr brahm` lsquopriestrsquo γνemicroα lsquoopinionrsquo rarr γνnmicroων lsquoexpertrsquo Lat sēmen lsquoseedrsquo rarr Sēmō

To these a few more of the same morphological type might be added

RV d`ma Gk δUmicroα (-m_) lsquogiftrsquo rarr RV (6442+) dām` (-mon-) lsquodonorrsquo RV dhaacuterma (-m_) lsquosupportrsquo rarr RV dharm` (-mon-) lsquobearer supporterrsquo RV saacutedma (-m_) lsquoseatrsquo rarr RV sadm` (-mon-) lsquoseated one inhabitantrsquo

712712712712 Some externallyexternallyexternallyexternally derived possessives that also yield agentives (including agentive ad-jectives) are

RV śaacuterma (el-m_) lsquoprotectionrsquo rarr Gmc helma- (elm[n]-o-) lsquoprotectorrsquo gt Goth hilms OE helm etc

RV gāth` lsquosongrsquo rarr gāthiacuten- (possessive -iacuten-) lsquosingerrsquo Gk στUνος lsquoa groanrsquo rarr στονUεντ- (possessive -[]εντ-) lsquogroaningrsquo Lat dictiō lsquospeech utterancersquo (Pac+) rarr dictiōsus (possessive -ōsus) lsquotalkative (person)rsquo (Varr)

72727272 The picture can easily be amplified however by adding the observation that posses-sives derived from verbal abstracts can show not the only the active value seen in agentives but a kind of passive value as well85

Ved ukthaacutem lsquopraisersquo rarr ukthiacuten- (possessive -iacuten-) lsquopraisingrsquo but also lsquopraisedrsquo Gk φUβος lsquofearrsquo rarr φοβερU- (possessive -roacute-)86 lsquofearing afraidrsquo but also lsquofeared fearsomersquo

73737373 And in some cases it is actually difficult mdash though perhaps not necessary mdash to choose between active and passive

gwheacuter-m_ lsquoheatrsquo (Arm ǐermn lsquofeverrsquo) rarr gwherm(n)-oacute- lsquohotrsquo (θερmicroUς) lt lsquoheatedrsquo lsquoheatingrsquo

74747474 This pairing of active and passive as semantic consequences of possessive derivation from verbal abstracts is reminiscent of the same phenomenon elsewhere mdash conspicuously in ldquopossessiverdquo compounds

Ved nī lsquoleadrsquo rarr nīthaacutem lsquoa leadingrsquo rarr sunīthaacute- lsquoleading wellrsquo but also lsquowell ledrsquo87 Gk βλNπτω lsquoharmrsquo rarr βλNβος lsquoinjuryrsquo rarr Lβλαβ5ς lsquonot harmingrsquo but also lsquounharmedrsquo

85 This phenomenon was made especially clear to me by Jochem Schindler per sermonem and in formal talks See also Schaffner 200196

86 Cf eg kruh2- lsquogorersquo (YAv xrū-) rarr kruh2-roacute- lsquogoryrsquo (Ved krūraacute- GYAv xrūra-) etc Gk frac34δHνη lsquopainrsquo rarr frac34δυνηρUς lsquopainfulrsquo (Pi Att) etc

87 This example of this phenomenon was pointed out to me many years ago by Jochem Schindler


75757575 To stop and assess for a moment then we may note that pursuing the question of the semantics of ldquopossessiverdquo derivatives of verbal abstracts quickly leads to the observation that various formally different possessive derivational types produce outputs which mdash while formally indistinguishable from possessives to concrete bases mdash can have either the ldquoactiverdquo value of agentives to the underlying verbal root or a ldquopassiverdquo value or both

8888 Active and passive pairing in verbal adnominals is exactly what is found in turn in thoseof the familiar τοmicroUς type beside nomina actionis of the associated τUmicroος type

81818181 The especially well known pairs include a R(Eacute)-o- nom act and an active R(E)-oacute- agentive

Ved śoacuteka- lsquoheatrsquo śokaacute- lsquoburningrsquo Gk τρUχος lsquorace racecoursersquo (Hp S+) τροχUς lsquowheelrsquo (Hom+) lsquorunningrsquo (Pi) Lat sonus lsquosoundrsquo (presumably sVoacutenhx-o-) Ved sva3naacute- lsquonoisyrsquo Gmc swana- lsquoswanrsquo

(sVonhx-oacute-)

82828282 But there are also cases of nom act R(Eacute)-o- beside passivepassivepassivepassive R(E)-oacute-

Av uruuaēsa- lsquoa whirlrsquo (Vroacuteo-) brvbarοικUς lsquobentrsquo (Vrooacute-) to Av uruuisiieiti lsquoturnsrsquo Ved kaacutelpa- lsquoarrangement orderrsquo (koacutelpo-) Gmc χalŠa- (kolpoacute-) lsquodividedrsquo gt lsquohalfrsquo (Goth halbs etc)88

83838383 And a good number of oxytone R(E)-oacute- stems that do not happen to be paired with a barytone R(Eacute)-o- also admit or demand a passive reading

831831831831 Hittite

marša- lsquofalsersquo (if via lsquowrong erroneousrsquo lt lsquoforgottenrsquo) lt morsoacute- Ved mDHyate lsquoforgetsrsquo etc

832832832832 Vedic

spārh-aacute- lsquodesired desirablersquo ( spDh lsquobe eager [for]rsquo) kart-aacute- lsquoholersquo ( kDt lsquocutrsquo) bhāg-aacute- lsquoportionrsquo ( bhaj lsquodistributersquo)

833833833833 Greek which offers quite a few good examples of passive R(E)-oacute-

δροπNordf δρεπτN lsquosliced offrsquo ( δρπω) λοιπUς lsquoleft remainingrsquo ( λεVπω lsquoleaversquo) brvbarοικUς lsquobentrsquo lt Vrooacute- ( Av uruuisiieiti lsquoturnsrsquo lt Vrioe-) δορUς lsquohide leather (bag)rsquo δρω lsquoflayrsquo λοπUς lsquopeel outer layerrsquo ( λπω lsquostrip offrsquo) beside concretized nom act λUπος lsquopeelrsquo νοmicroUς lsquograzing range habitation districtrsquo ( νmicroω lsquodistribute) tλκUς lsquofurrowrsquo ( oλκω lsquodrag drawrsquo) τροπUς lsquotwisted thong (for an oar)rsquo ( τρπω lsquoturn twistrsquo)

834834834834 Latin

uncus -a -um lsquobentrsquo beside uncus lsquohookrsquo ( γκος lsquoidrsquo) lt h2onkoacute- h2oacutenko-89 sulcus lsquofurrowrsquo ( tλκUς lsquoidrsquo) lt passive (or at least result noun) solkoacute-

88 This last example is taken from Schaffner 200196 89 It may be noted in passing here that Lat ancus lsquoqui aduncum brachium habetrsquo (P ex F) attests a h2anko- or

h2_ko- lsquobentrsquo (beside h2onkoacute- lsquobentrsquo) that looks judging by its markedly specialized meaning like an archa-ism This kind of root vocalism in nominals of this sort however is the topic of a different discussion

246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic

arga- (OIce argr OE earg OHG arg) lsquounmanly badrsquo (via lsquofututusrsquo) lt h1or7hoacute- Hitt ark-lsquomount sexuallyrsquo

blaka- (OE blaeligc OHG blah-faro lsquodark bluersquo) lsquoblackrsquo (via lsquoburntrsquo) lt bhlogoacute- Gk φλγωlsquoburnrsquo etc

tama- (OIce tamr OE tam OHG zam) lsquotamersquo lt domh2oacute- Gk δNmicroνηmicroι lsquosubduersquo etcχalŠa- (Goth halbs etc) lsquohalfrsquo (via lsquodividedrsquo) lt kolpoacute- as above (sect82)

84848484 There are even cases of both active and passive function side by side in one R(E)-oacute- stem

Ved active bhedaacute- lsquosundererrsquo passive bhedaacute- lsquoa split fissurersquo ( bhid lsquosplitrsquo) Hom active σκοπUς lsquospy watcherrsquo Hom passive σκοπUς lsquomark targetrsquo ( σκπτοmicroαι lsquolook atrsquo) Hom+ active τροφUς lsquofeeding rearing a nursersquo passive τροφoVordf LντW τοpound θρmicromicroατα (Hsch) Hdt+ active tλκUς lsquohauling enginersquo E+ passiveresult tλκUς lsquofurrowrsquo

85858585 An important conclusion to draw as explicitly and emphatically as possible at this point in the discussion is this The idea of a specifically possessivepossessivepossessivepossessive derivational relationship in pairs of the type

nom actvbl abstract R(Eacute)-o- (ldquoτUmicroοςrdquo) rarr agentpatient R(E)-oacute- (ldquoτοmicroUςrdquo)

is supported semantically by other possessive derivational types like

Ved ukthaacutem lsquopraisersquo rarr ukthiacuten- lsquopraisingrsquo but also lsquopraisedrsquo Gk στUνος lsquogroanrsquo rarr στονUεντ- lsquogroaningrsquo vs τmacrmicro5 lsquohonorrsquo ( τ degω) rarr τmacrmicro5εντ-τmacrmicroRντ- lsquohon-oredrsquo90

as well as by possessive compounds like

Ved nī lsquoleadrsquo rarr nīthaacutem lsquoleading guidancersquo rarr sunīthaacute- lsquoleading wellrsquo but also lsquowell ledrsquo Gk βλNπτω lsquoharmrsquo rarr βλNβος lsquoinjuryrsquo rarr Lβλαβ5ς lsquonot harmingrsquo but also lsquounharmedrsquo

and can take advantage of the independently observable possessive type

Ved kaacuterEa- lsquoearrsquo karEaacute- lsquolong-earedrsquo frac12βος lsquohumprsquo GβUς lsquohump-backedrsquo as above (sect624522 no 1)

while requiring no morphological assumptions beyond what is already guaranteed in any case by the existence of the well known type τUmicroος τomicroUς

9999 R(E)-oacute- derivatives beyond agents patients and results

91919191 The R(E)-oacute- derivatives mdash even if denominative to R(Eacute)-o- verbal abstracts in ultimate origin mdash were themselves effectively deverbative More particularly the semantic behavior of these R(E)-oacute- formations can be described as follows

999911111111 The R(E)-oacute- actives mdash both adjectives and agents mdash could be made from both transi-tive and intransitive roots

90 Hom τροφUεντ- lsquowell-fedrsquo and therefore lsquostout bigrsquo would seem to be an especially clear example of a pos-sessive (in -εντ-) with passive value There are however no attested instances anywhere of the τρUφος lsquonourishmentrsquo from which this τροφUεντ- would have been derived We have only the oxytone τροφUς which has both active and passive value (sect84)


(1) Transitives Ved ajaacute- lsquodriverrsquo ( aj) nāyaacute- lsquoleaderrsquo ( nī) vāhaacute- lsquodraft animalrsquo ( vah) etc Gk δοκUς lsquobearing beamrsquo ( δχοmicroαι lsquoreceive acceptrsquo) κοντUς lsquopolersquo ( κεντω lsquogoadrsquo) tλκUς lsquohauling enginersquo ( oλκω lsquodraw dragrsquo) τορUς lsquosharprsquo ( τετραVνω lsquopiercersquo) τροφUς lsquonursersquo ( τρφω lsquonourishrsquo)

(2) Intransitives Ved tośaacute- lsquohasteningrsquo ( tuś) śokaacute- lsquoburningrsquo ( śuc) sa3haacute- lsquosuperiorrsquo ( sah) svānaacute- lsquonoisyrsquo

( svani) etc Gk θοUς lsquoquickrsquo ( θω lsquorunrsquo) θορUς lsquosemenrsquo ( θρiquestσκω lsquoleaprsquo) τροχUς lsquorunning wheelrsquo

( τρχω)

912912912912 The R(E)-oacute- passives seen so far mdash both adjectives and patient or result nouns mdash nat-urally go with transitives only

(1) Patients Ved bhāraacute- lsquoloadrsquo λοπUς lsquopeelrsquo τροπUς lsquotwisted thongrsquo σκοπUς lsquotargetrsquo etc

(2) Results Ved kartaacute- lsquoholersquo tλκUςLat sulcus lsquofurrowrsquo Gmc χalŠa- lsquohalfrsquo etc

92929292 This amounts to the descriptive establishment of a semantically deverbative oxytone R(E)-oacute- type that is (1) at least potentially passive to transitives and (2) always active to in-transitives

93939393 Another much more conspicuous class of forms that is also passive to transitives and active to intransitives is the familiar primary adnominal traditionally called the ldquo-toacute- parti-ciplerdquo And a notable derivational type (especially well represented in Indic but found else-where as well) is a substantivization of this kind of -toacute- stem to yield something a little dif-ferent from a simple patient or result noun mdash namely a nomen rei actae that denotes not a concrete thing like a patient or a result but rather an individual instance of an action event or state and can accordingly also be labeled an ldquoinstantialrdquo

Ved iaacutem lsquoa wishrsquo ( i lsquowishrsquo) yuddhaacutem lsquobattlersquo ( yudh lsquofightrsquo) caritaacutem lsquotravel movementrsquo ( cari lsquomove go travel) yātaacutem lsquocoursersquo ( yā lsquotravelrsquo) śrāntaacutem lsquoeffortrsquo ( śrami lsquoget weary work hard make an effortrsquo) jātaacutem lsquobirthrsquo ( jani lsquobeget give birth produce creatersquo) puaacutem lsquoprosperityrsquo ( pu lsquothriversquo) etc

Hom τz φυκτN lsquoan escapersquo ( φεHγω lsquoescapersquo)91 Lat interdictum lsquoprohibitionrsquo ( interdīcere lsquoprohibit forbidrsquo) errātum lsquomistake lapsersquo ( errāre

lsquogo astray blunderrsquo) peccātum lsquomisstep sinrsquo ( peccāre lsquoblunder sinrsquo) OIr fecht lsquocourse journeyrsquo (f) lt Vektā- ( Ve7h- lsquoride travelrsquo) Gmc murthorna- lsquodeath murderrsquo (OIce moreth OE morthorn moreth OHG mord etc) lt mh-to- ( mer-

lsquodiersquo) sessa- lsquoseatrsquo (ON OE sess) lt sed-to- sed- lsquositrsquo (Goth sitan OE sittan etc)

94949494 As soon as it is synchronically (re)derived from its ultimately underlying verb which is an easy development to envision a R(E)-oacute- formation mdash akin to the -toacute- participle in being active to intransitives and potentially passive to transitives mdash might in theory show the se-mantics just seen in the type illustrated by Ved iaacutem lsquowishrsquo yātaacutem lsquocoursersquo jātaacutem lsquobirthrsquo etc

91 As in hellip micros δs νRας oλωσι καW οEκτι φυκτz πλωνται (Π 128+) ldquohellip lest they capture the ships and there be no longer any escaperdquo

248 Alan J Nussbaum

And that may be the explanation for the notable and somewhat mysterious instantials of the form R(E)-oacute- in Vedic92

Ved eaacute- lsquoa wishrsquo (cf iaacutem lsquoidrsquo) ghanaacute- lsquoa slayingrsquo tyāgaacute- lsquothe sacrifice (of onersquos life)rsquo nāvaacute- lsquoa cryrsquo sva3naacute- and sva3raacute- lsquoa soundrsquo havaacute- lsquoinvocationrsquo

An especially marked group are the neuters of this type

Ved gādhaacute- lsquoford (in a river) footingrsquo ( gadh lsquoclingrsquo) pāraacute- lsquofar side endrsquo ( pD lsquobring overrsquo) bhayaacute- lsquofearrsquo ( bhī lsquofearrsquo) which was replaced in Class Skt precisely by the -ta- derivative bhītam

And particularly notable because of the comparative evidence are R(E)-oacute- instantials like

Ved sādaacute- lsquoridingrsquo apparently corresponding exactly to tδUς lsquojourney roadrsquo (sod-oacute-) mdash

where the semantics are in addition highly reminiscent of

caritaacutem lsquotravel movementrsquo and yātaacutem lsquocoursersquo

95959595 If the Vedic nomina rei actae or instantials of the type ghanaacute- lsquoa slayingrsquo bhayaacute- lsquofearrsquo sādaacute- lsquoridingrsquo ( Gk tδUς lsquoroadrsquo) have this explanation two further conclusions fol-low immediately

951951951951 It means first of all that a secondary denominative ldquopossessive-passiverdquo type like R(E)-oacute- is capable of the same semantic range or liable to the same semantic development as a primary deverbative passive type like the -toacute- participle

952952952952 This in turn suggests the possibility that other secondary denominative ldquopossessive-passivesrdquo might have the value of a nomen rei actae too

10101010 And this throws potential new light on the formally possessive case that started the dis-cussion in the direction that it has now taken

teacuter(h2)-m_ (τρmicroα Lat termen) lsquoboundaryrsquo teacuter(h2)-mō(n) (τρmicroων) lsquoboundaryrsquo

101101101101 More specifically the τρmicroα τρmicroων case is unmistakably reminiscent of the equally possessive-looking (sect85) pairing of verbal abstract with instantial that was observed earlier (sect94) mdash ie

teacuter(h2)-m_ (τρmicroα Lat termen) lsquoboundaryrsquo teacuter(h2)-mō(n) (τρmicroων) lsquoboundaryrsquo ====poacutero- (πUρος) lsquoa crossing wayrsquo poroacute- (Ved pāraacute-) lsquocrossing boundary end destination far

sidersquo

102102102102 If so however grounds have now emerged on which it can be argued that parallel cases may be analyzed along the same lines

h2aacutenh1-m_ (Av ąnman- [n] lsquobreathrsquo) h2aacutenh1-mon- (OIr a(i)nim [f] lsquosoulrsquo)leacuteVk-sm_ lsquolightrsquo (Lat lūmen) leacuteVk-mon- lsquolightrsquo (Gmc leuχ-man- [m] gt OE lēoma ON ljoacutemi)Ved d`man- (n) lsquogiftrsquo dāmaacuten- (m) lsquogiftrsquo (beside possessive-agentive dāmaacuten- [m] lsquodonorrsquo) Ved dh`man- (n) lsquoestablishment sitersquo Gk θRmicroα (n) lsquotombrsquo (S) θηmicronν (m) lsquoheaprsquo (Hom+)

mdash including the more unusual (proterokinetic hysterokinetic [sect532]) but familiar case of

92 See Debrunner 1954100f Lubotsky 198867


suhx-m_ (Ved sypma [n] lsquothong bridlersquo) suhx-men- (Gk Gmicro5ν [m] lsquomembranersquo)

11111111 At the same time moreover we now have reason to expect that other formal means ofderiving possessives could also have been used to make such instantials

111111111111 In fact that prediction seems borne out by externally derived cases like

h2aacutenh1-m_ lsquobreathrsquo (Av ąnman-) h2aacutenh1m(n)-o- lsquowind breathrsquo (~νεmicroος Lat animus)h2Veacutet-m_ (Gk ~ετmicroαordf φλUξ οy δ= τ πνεpoundmicroα lsquobreathrsquo [EM]) h2Vetm(n)-oacute- (LετmicroUνordf τ πνεpoundmicroα

[Hsch] AgraveτmicroUς [A] lsquosteam vaporrsquo) -m_ gt αgtmicroατ- (cf αymicroασVα lsquowallrsquo [Hom+]) -m(n)-oacute- gt αymicroUς lsquohedgersquo (A) -m_ (OCS pismę lsquoletterrsquo) -m(n)-o- (ORuss pismo lsquoidrsquo) -m_ (RV dhaacuterman- lsquolawrsquo) -m(n)-o- (AV dhaacuterma- lsquoidrsquo)

112112112112 The same expectation furthermore would also seem to be met by mdash or is at least en-tirely consistent with mdash pairs that look like internal and external derivatives respectively of a basis that does not itself have an attested reflex in any language of the family

daacuteh2-m_ ( dah2 lsquodividersquo) Ved dāmaacuten- lsquopart sharersquo (dah2-mon-) δmicroοςδRmicroος lsquopoliticalethnic grouprsquo (dah2m(n)-o-)

keVdh-m_ ( keVdh lsquohidersquo) Hom+ κευθmicronν lsquohiding placersquo (keVdh-mon-) Hom+ κευθmicroUςlsquoidrsquo (keVdhm(n)-oacute-)

12121212 As a kind of aside it would not seem out of place to sketch out at this stage of the dis-cussion a second possible approach to motivating mdash or at least paralleling mdash the use of otherwise possessive derivational morphology to make instantials from basic verbal ab-stracts

121121121121 The starting point for this alternative conception would be the question of whether in-stantial derivatives of verbal abstracts might not simply be analogous to delibatives derived from concrete mass nouns

122122122122 More particularly it might be reasoned since nomina actionis are a type of mass noun in a comparatively abstract conception of what the ldquomass nounrdquo category takes in it is per-haps not out of the question to consider a scheme like this one

Mass Noun Sample of the Mass Concrete Voacuted-h lsquowaterrsquo Veacuted-ōr lsquoa mass body ldquostretchrdquo of waterrsquoAbstract teacuter(h2)-m_ lsquocrossingrsquo teacuter(h2)-mō(n) lsquoa crossingrsquo

mdash though the inner workings remain to be explicitly clarified

11113333 Are the forms that point to patterns like -m_ rarr -mon- andor -m_ rarr -m(n)-o- as deriva-tional means of making instantials inherited

131131131131 It is not necessary to the analysis being proposed here to suppose that very many of these particular forms actually go back to the proto-language Nor is it especially attractive

132132132132 The suggestion is rather that an association between the precise derivational semantics supposed here and ldquopossessiverdquo derivational morphological processes to encode it was characteristic both of the IE languages and presumably PIE itself The hypothesis is there-fore that the persistent connection between the semantics and morphology of the kinds in

250 Alan J Nussbaum

question would have motivated repeated derivational events of the types highlighted in this discussion

14141414 It is to be acknowledged from the outset of course that the semantic contrast betweenthe verbal abstract and the instantial made from a given verb or verbal root is bound to be a fragile one To make this point clearer and more precise it is only necessary to consider a few specific cases of the sort of semantic pairing that has just been envisioned

slaughter vs athe slaughter wishing vs athe wish crossing vs athe crossing fighting vs athe fight sounding vs athe sound breathing vs athe breath

In the first place the pragmatic domains of the abstract and the instantial overlap since it is easy to imagine a practically unlimited number circumstances in which either could be used There was fighting yesterday = There was a fight yesterday This can only be expect-ed to lead over time to the adoption of abstract value by original instantials and vice versa And it is simply a commonplace that a given morphological class of substantives that may for good reason be considered essentially a verbal abstract type will contain many instan-tials To choose an example literally at random it is only typical that neuter -men- stems which were semantically abstract enough as verbal derivatives to supply infinitives in Greek (-microεναι) also include in their number countless instantials in Greek and elsewhere βmicroαβRmicroα lsquoa step footfallrsquo (beside verbal abstract lsquoact of walkingrsquo) Lat agmen lsquoa course marchrsquo (beside other kinds of concrete meanings but never any longer a nom act to agere) Ved aacutejman- lsquocoursersquo (also beside concrete lsquoexpeditionrsquo vel sim) All of this could be expected to wear away the abstract vs instantial contrast at all stages and in all lan-guages mdash which has presumably happened more often than not

gwhoacuteno- (Gk φUνος) lsquomurderrsquo gt lsquo(athe) murderrsquogwhonoacute- (Ved ghanaacute-) lsquoathe murderrsquo gt lsquo(athe) murderrsquo

h2aacutenh1-m_ (Av ąnman-) lsquobreathingrsquo gt lsquo(athe) breathrsquoh2aacutenh1-mon- (OIr a(i)nim) and h2aacutenh1m(n)-o- (~νεmicroος Lat animus) lsquoathe breathrsquo (gt lsquosoulrsquo) gt

lsquobreathrsquo

And it may be noted in particular that the erosion of any such original semantic distinction between a neut nom act and its internally derived masc or fem to nom rei actae would leave the formal characteristics of such derivation seeming to mark nothing but a change of gender or if one likes the semantically endocentric derivation of a non-neuter version of the basis as in some of the examples introduced earlier (and cf sect52 no 3)

leacuteVk-sm_ (n) lsquolightrsquo (Lat lūmen) leacuteVk-mon- (m) lsquolightrsquo (Gmc leuχ-man- gt OE lēoma ONljoacutemi)

suhx-m_ (n) lsquobindingrsquo (Ved sypma) suhx-men- (Gk Gmicro5ν)teacuter(h2)-m_ (n) lsquocrossing boundaryrsquo (Gk τρmicroα Lat termen) teacuter(h2)-mō(n) (τρmicroων) lsquocros-

sing boundaryrsquo Ved d`man- (n) lsquogiftrsquo dāmaacuten- (m) lsquogiftrsquo Ved dh`man- (n) lsquoestablishment sitersquo Gk θRmicroα (n) lsquotombrsquo (S) θηmicronν (m) lsquoheaprsquo

15151515 Instantial derivatives of neuter heteroclites

151151151151 If then it is in fact the derivation of a possessive instantial or nomen rei actae that is seen in


teacuter(h2)-m_ (τρmicroα Lat termen) lsquocrossingrsquo rarr teacuter(h2)-mō(n) (τρmicroων) lsquoa crossing boundaryrsquo

it seems reasonable to suspect the same kind of derivational semantics in a case that appears completely parallel morphologically speaking mdash even if the gender of the output diverges kweacute-mh (τκmicroαρ) lsquomanifestation indicationrsquo rarr kweacute-mōr (τκmicroωρ) lsquoan indication asign a signalrsquo

111155552222 As a final point to make under this heading moreover it might be added (cf sect4725) that another example of an internal (ie possessive) derivative of a neuter heteroclite that may plausibly be hypothesized to have originally had the value of an instantial is the word for lsquoroadrsquo ultimately reflected by Toch A ytār B ytārye (both fem) The idea that the To-charian word(s) ultimately reflect an internal derivative has been put forth a number of times93 The actual function of the derivative however where spelled out at all has been specified as ldquocollectiverdquo without further discussion of exactly what is implied by using that term For surely this lexical item does not denote anything obviously collective like a net-work of streets The formal and semantic picture suggested by the discussion here of course would immediately accommodate this item as an instantial

h1i-th -ten- lsquotravelrsquo (Lat iter itin[er]- lsquojourneyrsquo) rarr h1i-tōr lsquoa trip a coursersquo (TA ytār cf Bytārye lsquoroadrsquo)

16161616 As just indicated there remains of course the loose end of the contrast in gender-pair-ings between

neuter masculine in τρmicroα τρmicroων

and

neuter neuter in τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ

161161161161 Although this situation does certainly raise a question it is not entirely obvious that it poses a problem It must in any case be approached in the context of a more comprehensive picture of the genders shown by the various semantic types of ldquopossessiverdquo derivatives from verbal abstracts that have come up in the discussion to this point These are partly pre-dictable and partly not

1611161116111611 Possessive-agentives are masculine as expected (sectsect622 711ndash2)

Ved braacutehma lsquoprayerrsquo rarr brahm` lsquopriestrsquo γνemicroα lsquoopinionrsquo rarr γνnmicroων lsquoexpertrsquo etc RV gāth` lsquosongrsquo rarr gāthiacuten- lsquosingerrsquo Lat dictiō lsquospeech rarr dictiōsus lsquotalkative (person)rsquo

1612161216121612 Possessive-collectives and possessive-delibatives that are externally derived are neuter or are the feminine -h2 derivatives of the stem of such a neuter (sectsect623ndash624)

16121161211612116121 Externally derived neuter collective

Lat arbōs lsquotreersquo rarr arbustum lsquocopse plantationrsquo Ved aacuteśva- lsquohorsersquo goacute- lsquocowrsquo rarr aacuteśvāvat goacutemat lsquowealth in horses wealth in cattlersquo

16122161221612216122 Externally derived neuter delibative

Gk πpoundρ πregρ- lsquofirersquo rarr πregρ-U- πregρN -eν lsquowatchfirersquo Lat strāmen lsquostrawrsquo (-m_) rarr strāmentum lsquoa bundle of strawrsquo (-m_-to-)

93 See NIL220 224ndash226

252 Alan J Nussbaum

16123161231612316123 Externally derived feminine collective

Gk φρNτηρ lsquoclansmanrsquo rarr φρNτρ-uml lsquoclanrsquo (-oe- without vAacuteddhi plus -h2)

16124161241612416124 Externally derived feminine delibative

Gk πregρ- (ph2-ur-) lsquofirersquo rarr πregρ copyπregρ5 (ph2ureacute-h2) lsquoa burning mass pyrersquo PIE Voacuted-hVeacuted-n- lsquowaterrsquo rarr udna-h2 lsquoa mass of water waversquo gt Lat unda

1613161316131613 Possessive-collectives and possessive-delibatives that are internally derived on the other hand appear to be neuter only (or plausibly taken as original neuters that have changed gender)

16131161311613116131 Internally derived neuter collective

PIE hneacuteh3-m_-men- (Ved n`ma Lat nōmen etc) lsquonamersquo rarr -mō(n) (Goth namo [n] OHG namo etc [n gt m]) lsquoset (= pair) of namesrsquo

16132161321613216132 Internally derived neuter delibative

PIE h1^sh2-h-n- (Gk frac14αρ Hitt ēšn-) lsquobloodrsquo rarr h1eacutesh2-ōr-n- (Toch A ysār B yasar Hitt iškan-)

PIE h3oacutengw-_-en- (Lat unguen) lsquogrease fatrsquo rarr h3oacutengw-ō(n) (OHG ancho [n gt m] lsquobutterrsquo) PIE paacuteh2-Vh-Ven- (Hitt pakkur pakwen-) lsquofirersquo rarr paacuteh2-Vōrph2u-n- (Toch B pūwar cf

Goth fon)

1614161416141614 As to possessive-instantials in this connection it seems so far that the gender of de-rivatives that can be assigned to this class mdash both external and internal ones mdash is especial-ly unconstrained

16141161411614116141 Externally derived instantials (sect11) mdash best taken as such because the masc forms at least argue against collective or delibative analysis (sectsect1612ndash1613)

neut h2aacutenh1m_ lsquobreathrsquo (Avąnman-) rarr masc h2aacutenh1m(n)os lsquowind breathrsquo (~νεmicroος Lat animus) fem h2aacutenh1m(n)a-h2 (Lat anima lsquobreath of lifersquo)

neut h2Veacutetm_ lsquobreathrsquo (Gk ~ετmicroα) rarr neut h2Vetm(n)oacute- lsquobreathrsquo (LετmicroUν) vs masc h2Vetm(n)oacute- ( AgraveτmicroUς)

16142161421614216142 Internally derived instantials (sect11) mdash where the gender (non-neuter) of the deriv-ative again counsels against a collective or delibative analysis

neut h2aacutenh1-m_ (Av ąnman- lsquobreathrsquo) rarr fem h2aacutenh1-mon- (OIr a(i)nim lsquosoulrsquo) neut leacuteVk-sm_ lsquolightrsquo (Lat lūmen) masc leacuteVk-mon- lsquolightrsquo (Gmc leuχ-man- gt OE lēoma

ON ljoacutemi)

and most most familiar of all from earlier in the present discussion

neut teacuter(h2)-m_ (τρmicroα Lat termen) lsquoboundaryrsquo masc teacuter(h2)-mō(n) (τρmicroων) lsquoboundaryrsquo

1615161516151615 The interim conclusion to which this leads can therefore be simply stated It is that the contrast in gender-pairings between

neuter vbl abstract τρmicroα masculine instantial τρmicroων

and


neuter vbl abstract τκmicroαρ neuter instantial τκmicroωρ

is not necessarily more problematical than what has just been observed in the analogously contrasting cases

neuter vbl abstract Av ąnman- masculine instantial Gk ~νεmicroος Lat animus

and

neuter vbl abstract Gk ~ετmicroα neuter instantial Gk LετmicroUν

162162162162 Although the gender disparity exhibited by neut τκmicroαρ neut τκmicroωρ vs neut τρmicroα masc τρmicroων can therefore be matched up to a point as just observed it would certainly have to be granted that further discussion of the question is not unwarranted And if the divergence between τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ and the various pairings like τρmicroα τρmicroων or Ved dh`man- (n) θRmicroα (n) θηmicronν (m) or Ved sypma (n) Gmicro5ν (m) is to be account-ed for in a genuinely specific way there would seem to be two approaches available94

1621162116211621 The first of these would involve two steps

(1) The framing of a hypothesis Just as neut concreta (heteroclitic or not) made only neut collectives and delibatives if those were produced by internal derivation so too were neuter verbal abstracts that were heteroclitic limited to neuter instantials if they were internally derived (τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ) while ldquohomocliticrdquo bases had no such preference in their instantials (τρmicroα τρmicroων)

(2) An attempt to find a rationale for this distribution

16211162111621116211 As for the rationale it would obviously be difficult to produce independent evi-dence corroborating a preference for neut internal derivatives (of no matter what semantic type) that was supposedly shown by neut heteroclites but not by other neuters

16212162121621216212 Furthermore as altogether scarce as the evidence on this point is what little we have may well contradict the initial assumption that heteroclitic (and so necessarily neut) verbal abstracts prefer neuters as their internally derived instantials in the first place Toch A ytār lsquoroadrsquo (sectsect5 6 152) ultimately reflecting a h1i-tōr and thus a prima facie internal derivative of h1(eacute)i-th -teacuten- (gt Lat iter itin[er]-) with instantial value is synchronically feminine and not neuter There is no reason moreover to insist that the feminine gender of this word is not original especially since the other -ōr forms inherited by Tocharian which mdash as delibatives mdash were neuter remained neuter B pūwar lsquofirersquo A ysār B yasar lsquobloodrsquo (sectsect4726 62433) And even if it is true that collectives and delibatives that were internally derived from heteroclites (inter alia) were always neuter nothing would exclude the possibility of a non-neuter internal derivative of a heteroclite if its derivational seman-tics were something other than collective or delibative A case in point is provided by the word for lsquosunrsquo with a basic proterokinetic paradigm saacuteh2-Vd sh2-(u)Veacuten- (GAv huuar Ved suvagraver GAv gen xvEg) giving rise to an amphikinetic internal derivative from which a paradigmatically leveled stem allomorph sh2Vōl was generalized in Lat sōl lsquosunrsquo which is masculine If this is any guide it would appear that a neuter heteroclite could indeed be the basis of a non-neuter internal derivative Presumably such a non-neuter derivative was

94 The third logically possible scenario amounts to starting from a setup in which the type of derivative reflected in τκmicroωρ was originally of animate gender and became neuter secondarily This seems to me to be the hardest case to make and will therefore not get full treatment here

254 Alan J Nussbaum

not itself heteroclitic but would instead have generalized the morph (ie -(oe)r or -(oe)l) that characterized the underlying neuter nom-acc as the stem formant of its entire para-digm We thus come to the conclusion that if neut saacuteh2-Vd sh2-(u)Veacuten- rarr masc saacuteh2Vōl sh2ul- is an admissible possibility so should h1(eacute)i-th h1i-teacuten- rarr femh1(eacute)i-tōr h1i-tr- be The immediate consequence is that there can be no general rule bywhich heteroclitic neut verbal abstracts prefer neuters as their internally derived instantials And the basis of this first approach to the question of neut τκmicroαρ neut τκmicroωρ vs neut τρmicroα masc τρmicroων therefore disappears From what has just been seen in other words the gender aspect of neut τκmicroαρ rarr neut τκmicroωρ was not an outcome predetermined by anything essential

1622162216221622 A second possible approach to neut τκmicroαρ neut τκmicroωρ vs neut τρmicroα masc τρmicroων

16221162211622116221 This would also have two elements

(1) It could be proposed in the abstract that instantials as a type of delibative (sect12) were always neuter if derived internally This would amount to an ultimate starting point like

verbal abstract -mh -meacuten- rarr neuter instantial -mōr -mn- (exemplified by τκmicroαρ τκmicroωρ)

verbal abstract -m_ -meacuten- rarr neuter neuter neuter neuter instantial -mō(n) -mn- (ie original neuter gen-der for τρmicroων etc)

(2) The auxiliary assumption here would obviously have to be that the entire category of one-time instantial ldquoneutersrdquo of the type (sectsect10ndash11) daacuteh2mō(n) lsquoa divisionrsquo dheacuteh1mō(n) lsquoa depositationrsquo h2aacutenh1mō(n) lsquoa breathrsquo keacuteVdhmō(n) lsquoa conceal-mentrsquo leacuteVkmō(n) lsquoan illuminationrsquo etc mdash certainly including teacuter(h2)mō(n) lsquoa crossing border endpointrsquo mdash systematically became non-neuter by purely formal analogy to the class(es) of masculines (and some feminines) that also inflected nom -mō(n) obl -mn- (eg the possessive-agentive type Ved brahm` lsquopriestrsquo Gk γνnmicroων lsquoexpertrsquo [sectsect622 711]) Put another way this would amount to recogniz-ing mdash both on a large scale and at an early (presumably PIE) stage mdash an analogical gender change of the kind seen in a far more limited way in Germanic (sectsect16131ndash2) with the change of neut collective namō(n) lsquonamersquo (Goth namo) to masc (OHG namo OE nama etc) and the change of a probably neut delibative ankō lsquo(quantity of) greasersquo to masc as well (OHG ancho) The failure in this scenario of a neuter like kweacutemōr (gt τκmicroωρ) to adopt masc or fem gender in an analogous way would plainly be due to the putative absence of a conspicuous class of non-neuters with nom sg in -mōr to serve as the model

16216216216222222222 Although nothing would positively appear to stand in the way of this view of the matter it may not be entirely safe to take for granted the absence of animates with nom sg -mōr in PIE For even if a reflex of such an item cannot be pointed to there is nothing in principle mdash as h1i-tōr lsquowayrsquo and sh2-Vōl lsquosunrsquo make clear (sect16212) mdash that would have barred a masc or fem internal derivative of any -m_ -meacuten- stems that may have existed

163163163163 There consequently seem to be two different ways of dealing with the superficial asymmetry displayed by the pair with which we started mdash ie neut τκmicroαρ neut τκmicroωρ vs neut τρmicroα masc τρmicroων


1631163116311631 As just suggested (sect1622) it might be workable to suppose that non-neuter instan-tials (nomina rei actae) of the type h2aacutenh1mō(n) lsquoa breathrsquo (OIr a(i)nim [f] lsquosoulrsquo) leacuteVkmō(n) lsquoan illuminationrsquo (Gmc leuχ-man- [m] gt OE lēoma etc) teacuter(h2)mō(n) lsquoacrossingrsquo (τρmicroων) reflect a class of quondam neuters

1632163216321632 The other possibility is that internally derived instantials even those made from het-eroclitic neuter bases could be but did not have to be non-neuter from the start and that neuter beside non-neuter gender in such internal derivatives is parallel to the same indeter-minacy among externally derived instantials (sectsect16141ndash2) mdash like masc h2aacutenh1m(n)os lsquowind breathrsquo (~νεmicroος Lat animus) beside fem h2aacutenh1m(n)a-h2 (Lat anima lsquobreath of lifersquo) and especially like neut h2Vetm(n)oacutem lsquobreathrsquo (LετmicroUν) vs masc h2Vetm(n)oacutes ( AgraveτmicroUς)

1633163316331633 All in all the existence of h1i-tōr lsquocourse wayrsquo (Toch A ytār lsquoroadrsquo) goes a con-siderable way toward vindicating this second approach It should be said however that the actual reason for the gender diversity among the derivatives of this precise type remains to be explained

17171717 The next step here would be to explore more cases in which the functional derivationaltype

nomen actionis rarr nomen rei actae (instantial)

is carried out by still other formants that are basically possessive

171171171171 To be sure there proves to be a considerable number of instantial derivatives that evi-dently conform rather precisely to this general description Introducing any significant number of them right here however would expand this discussion beyond any reasonable limit And a thorough study of very many of these additional types would obviously expand it still further

172172172172 The discussion might be brought to a close for the moment however with the men-tion of at least one additional potentially relevant thing with detailed analysis and discus-sion postponed to a future occasion Since to be precise various possessive derivatives of verbal abstracts in -m_-meacuten- have been proposed as instantials here it would be fitting to mention -m_-to- as another

1721172117211721 An appropriate first order of business under this heading would be the presentation of some evidence in specific support of the idea as reasonable in the abstract as it may be that -m_-meacuten- andor -mon--mn- stems in fact made possessive denominative deriva-tives in -m_-to-

17211172111721117211 That point might ultimately be made by way of a certain number of cases like Gk θαpoundmicroα lsquoa marvelrsquo rarr θαυmicroατU- lsquomarvellousrsquo (θαυmicroατz sectργα [Hymns Hes]) if it can be de-cisively shown that θαυmicroατU- is a sure case of -microα-τU- (lt -m_-to-) and that the analysis θαυmicroατ-U- is out of the question95

95 θαυmicroατU- is not in any case likely to be deverbative from θαυmicroαVνω (Hom [fut θαυmicroανοντες] Hymns Anacr+) since θαυmicroαντU- would be expected (GφαVνω lsquoweaversquo [Hom+] GφαντUς [S] etc) These deverba-tive -τU- adnominals moreover show a marked and well known limitation to compounds at an early date (Hom κρumlαVνω lsquoaccomplishrsquo Lκρ copyαντον lsquounfulfilledrsquo etc) From θαυmicroNζω (Hom+) on the other hand the deverbative is the predictable and frequently attested θαυmicroαστU- (HDem Archil+)

256 Alan J Nussbaum

17212172121721217212 However that may be an apparently neglected example of straightforwardly pos-sessive -m_-meacuten- (or -mon--mn-) rarr -m_-to- is credibly provided by the Latin neut armentum (Cato+) and rare but early fem armenta (Enn Pac) which mean (a) lsquoa horse a single head of cattlersquo (armentum armenta) and (b) lsquoa herd a herd of cattle deer elephants etcrsquo96 (armentum)

172121172121172121172121 The etymology of this word that is most often mentioned97 amounts to a connec-tion with armus (m) lsquoshoulderrsquo and arma (n pl tant) lsquoweapons toolsrsquo lt h2ar(hx)- lsquojoin fit (together)rsquo This of course is semantically very difficult requiring as it does either a de-velopment of something like lsquothat which is joined (together)rsquo to lsquoherdrsquo98 or else lsquothat which is jointedrsquo to lsquoherd animalrsquo Neither of these hypothetical semantic histories is plausi-ble The first of them ignores the ample evidence indicating that h2ar(hx)- first and fore-most meant lsquojoin fit (together) articulatersquo rather than lsquojoin associatersquo or still less lsquojoin aggregatersquo The second mdash since h2ar(hx)-mn(o)- manifestly denoted not only the anatomi-cal joints of herd animals but also those of other animals and even humans as well as nam-ing all manner of wholly inanimate fittings mdash lacks all circumstantial cogency as an expla-nation of why armentum-a should actually mean what it does Furthermore the lsquo(thing)

96 See OLD172 col 2 for citations 97 The most recent endorsement of this etmology is that of EDL sv arma -ōrum So also LEWI68 and DELL

47 both sv armentum See also Perrot 1961169ndash170 98 The most elaborate piece of advocacy for h2ar(hx)- lsquojoinrsquo as the root of armentum is undoubtedly that of Rei-

chelt 1914316ndash320 which takes the lsquo(thing) joined (together)rsquo gt lsquoherdrsquo approach and introduces a very con-siderable number of derivatives of the root h2ar(hx)- (both direct and ldquoextendedrdquo) in support of this etymolo-gy but without producing anything that would impose itself as a convincing semantic parallel Another root etymology for armentuma that has been espoused from time to time would put the word among the derivatives of h2arh3- lsquoplowrsquo and thus Lat arāre in one way or another This approach goes back to the ancients (Varr LL 596) but is also endorsed by eg Skutsch 1909348 in the form arāmeacutentuma gt arămeacutentuma (iambic shortening) gt armentuma (unworkable see Reichelt 1914316) and by Walker 1889 244ndash245 in the more hypothetical (and equally nonviable) form aroV- (~ρουρα) arŭ- rarr arŭmento- gt armentum Beyond the morphological difficulties with the preform this etymology is untenable because (1) an armentuma is a herd animal and not a plow animal (2) the lsquoherdrsquo meaning is inexplicable by this etymolo-gy since herds and plowing simply have no pragmatic intersection and (3) although h2arh3-men- gt arămen- gt armen- would be entirely in accord with Latin sound laws the evidence of a -men- stem to thisroot is essentially confined to Lithuanian (ie armuotilde lsquofieldrsquo etc NIL322) since Lρnmicroατα lsquoplowed land(s)rsquo (S Eup+) is liable to be a Greek analogical creation made to LρUω lsquoplowrsquo (Hom+) on the model of the type ζηλUω lsquoemulatersquo (Hes+) ζ5λωmicroα lsquoobject of emulationrsquo (E+) microισθUω lsquotake payment for (the use of)rsquo (Ar+) microVσθωmicroα lsquopayment for temporary usersquo (Hdt+) et sim And even if an inherited h2arh3-m(e)n- could be count-ed on to serve as the basis of a Latin derivative yielding armentum the -men- stem in question would have meant lsquoarable land field(s) for cropsrsquo to judge by what supporting evidence there is Why a word for pasture animals and not agricultural work animals would be derived from a word for lsquofield for cropsrsquo rather than from a word for lsquopasturersquo or the like would need to be explained The most colorful proposal of which I am aware is that of Godel 1962 who argues (having rightly dis-missed an etymology by way of arāre) that ldquohellip dans le vocabulaire latin qui nous est connu on ne voit qursquoun verbe dont la racine puisse se retrouver dans armentum arcere armentum lt arc-mentom (ou arxmentom cf IOVXMENTA)rdquo and proceeds to argue that the term armentum comes to denote a pastured animal by way of an arcere pecus an unattested Old Latin expression that is taken to mean ldquotenir le beacutetail eacuteloigneacute (des eacutetables)rsquo crsquoest-agrave-dire au pacircturagerdquo As will be suggested momentarily (sect172122) however there is indeed another verbal root seen elsewhere in Latin that could be the basis of armentuma In addition the semantic development hypothesized here for the h2ark- of arcēre contrived as it is must be considered comparatively weak


joined (together)rsquo gt lsquoherdrsquo version of the history of this word does not really provide an ac-count of the meaning lsquo(single) head of livestockrsquo for armentum and armenta while lsquojoint-ed (thing)rsquo does not explain in any direct way why armentum can mean lsquoherdrsquo

172122172122172122172122 But the assignment of this word to h2ar(hx)- or to any r(hx)-final root as pho-nologically obvious as it may seem at first sight may be entirely illusory For Latin -rm- regularly continues not only -r(V)m- but also -nm-

kan-m_ gt Lat carmen lsquosong poemrsquo7enh1mn- gt 7enmn- gt Lat germen lsquosprout budrsquo

And this makes it possible to suppose a far more semantically plausible etymology which not only suits the meanings lsquoherdrsquo and lsquolivestockrsquo well in a general way but can also pro-vide an immediate basis for both of them simultaneously

h2anh1mn- lsquobreath of lifersquo (Av ąnman- OIr a(i)nim) gt h2anmn-rarr h2anm_-to- lsquoliving thing livestockrsquo gt anmento- gt armentum armenta

The effect of this proposal to put it another way is a picture in which the inherited stem h2an(h1)mn- ( h2aacuten(h1)m_ -meacuten- or h2aacuten(h1)mō(n) -mn-) made a possessive externalderivative with the meaning lsquoliving thing live propertyrsquo at a presumably early date while a putatively later derivational event started with Lat anima (or with its predecessor anama3) which replaced the -men- stem(s) in Latin and produced the -āli- derivative eventually appearing as animāl that took over as the general word for lsquoliving creaturersquo and left the older anmentoa3- (or armentoa3-) confined to the narrower meanings lsquoherd animalrsquo and lsquolivestock herdrsquo99

1722172217221722 The standard example in any event of this possessive-looking -m_-to- in a verbal abstract that is therefore liable to have started life as an instantial is

leacuteV-m_ (Av sraoman- [n] lsquohearingrsquo)rarr leacuteVm_-to- gt Ved śroacutemata- lsquogood reputersquo OHG hliumunt (m) lsquorenownrsquo100

The internally derived correspondent is also found in this case

leacuteV-m_ rarr leacuteV-mon- (m) gt Goth hliuma lsquo(sense of) hearingrsquo

1723172317231723 But the largest group of such possessive-instantials (though often concretized) are the Latin class of deverbative nouns in -mentum (and especially in the earliest period -menta) A few cases of -men beside -mentum at an early date are

cognōmen Pl+ cognōmentum Pl stabilīmen Acc stabilīmentum Pl mōmen Enn mōmentum Ter+ tormen Cato tormentum Pl+

99 I now see that this root etymology was already proposed by Breacuteal 1910ndash1163ndash64 where the point being made is that the armus and arma (reflecting anmo- and anmā-) that Breacuteal expected in place of Lat animus lsquomindrsquo and anima lsquosoulrsquo are made more likely by armentum which is a Latin -mentum formation made from the same root For present purposes this only needs to be modified to the more particular claim that the -men- stem h2an(h1)-m(E)n- continued as a neuter in Avestan and as a fem in Old Irish served here as the basis of a specifically possessive denominative derivative h2anm_-to- lsquoenlivened liversquo that surfaces as Lat armentum lsquoanimal livestockrsquo The question on which Breacuteal was more immediately focusing mdash ie an-(mento-) in the preform of armentum vs ana-(mo-mā-) in those of animusanima mdash is another matter (cf note 63)

100 See eg Brugmann 1906240 403

258 Alan J Nussbaum

None of this however can be pursued any further here and now

BibliographyBibliographyBibliographyBibliography

Adams Douglas Q 1999 A Dictionary of Tocharian B Amsterdam Atlanta Ga AiW = Bartholomae Christian 1961 Altiranisches Woumlrterbuch Zweite unveraumlnderte Auflage Ber-

lin Anttila Raimo 2000 Greek and Indo-European Etymology in Action Proto-Indo-European AAring-

Amsterdam Philadelphia Bader Franccediloise 1984 ldquoAutour de Polyphegraveme le Cyclope agrave lrsquooeil brillant diathegravese et visionrdquo Die

Sprache 30109ndash137 Bechtel Friedrich 1914 Lexilogus zu Homer Etymologie und Stammbildung homerischer Woumlrter

Halle an der Saale Breacuteal Michel 1910ndash11 ldquoNotes drsquoeacutetymologierdquo MSL 1659ndash66 Brugmann Karl 1906 Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen

Vol 21 Lehre von den Wortformen und ihrem Gebrauch Allgemeines Zusammensetzung (Komposita) Nominalstaumlmme Strassburg

Chantraine Pierre 1933 La formation des noms en grec ancien Paris Cowgill Warren 1969 ldquoOn the Origin of the Indic e-Precativerdquo MSS 2527ndash38 Debrunner Albert 1907 ldquoZu den konsonantischen o-Praumlesentien im Griechischen Dritter Teilrdquo IF

21201ndash276 mdashmdashmdash 1954 Altindische Grammatik Vol 22 Die Nominalsuffixe Goumlttingen DELG2 = Chantraine Pierre 2009 Dictionnaire eacutetymologique de la langue grecque histoire des

mots Acheveacute par Jean Taillardat Olivier Masson et Jean-Louis Perpillou avec en suppleacute-ment les Chroniques drsquoeacutetymologie grecque (1ndash10) rassembleacutees par Alain Blanc Charles de Lamberterie et Jean-Louis Perpillou Nouvelle edition Paris

DELL = Ernout Alfred and Antoine Meillet 1959 Dictionnaire eacutetymologique de la langue latine Histoire des mots 4 eacutedition Paris

DGEEP = Schwyzer Eduard ed 1923 Dialectorum Graecarum Exempla Epigraphica Potiora Lip-siae

Dubois Laurent 1986 Recherches sur le dialecte arcadien Vols IndashIII Louvain-la-Neuve EDG = Beekes Robert S P (with the assistance of Lucien van Beek) 2010 Etymological Dictionary

of Greek Leiden Boston EDL = Vaan Michiel de 2008 Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages

Leiden Boston EWAia = Mayrhofer Manfred 1986ndash2001 Etymologisches Woumlrterbuch des Altindoarischen Vols

1ndash3 Heidelberg Frisk Hjalmar 1966 Kleine Schriften zur Indogermanistik und zur griechischen Wortkunde Stock-

holm GEW = Frisk Hjalmar 1955ndash72 Griechisches etymologisches Woumlrterbuch Vols 1ndash2 Heidelberg Godel Robert 1962 ldquoLatin armentumrdquo Cahiers Ferdinand de Saussure 1993ndash99 Gonda Jan 1960 ldquoReflections on the Indo-European Medium IIrdquo Lingua 9175ndash193 IEW = Pokorny Julius 1959ndash69 Indogermanisches etymologisches Woumlrterbuch Bern Muumlnchen Irslinger Britta 2009 ldquoGenus und Nominalaspektrdquo HS 1221ndash30 Jamison Stephanie 1983 Function and Form in the -aacuteya- Formations of the Rig Veda and Atharva

Veda Goumlttingen Jasanoff Jay 2003 Hittite and the Indo-European Verb Oxford LEIA = Vendryes Joseph et al 1959ndash Lexique eacutetymologique de lrsquoirlandais ancien A B C MndashP

RndashS TndashU Dublin LEW = Walde Alois and Johann Baptist Hofmann 1938ndash54 Lateinisches etymologisches Woumlrter-

buch Vols 1ndash2 Heidelberg


Lipp Reiner 2009 Die indogermanischen und einzelsprachlichen Palatale im Indoiranischen Vols 1ndash2 Heidelberg

LIV2 = Rix Helmut et al 2001 Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben die Wurzeln und ihre Pri-maumlrstammbildungen Unter Leitung von Helmut Rix und der Mitarbeit vieler anderer bearbei-tet von Martin Kuumlmmel et al 2 erweiterte und verbesserte Auflage Wiesbaden

Lubotsky Alexander M 1988 The System of Nominal Accentuation in Sanskrit and Proto-Indo-European Leiden

Macdonell Arthur A 1910 Vedic Grammar Strassburg Malzahn Melanie 2010 The Tocharian Verbal System Leiden Melchert H Craig 1983 ldquoA lsquoNewrsquo PIE men-Suffixrdquo Die Sprache 291ndash26 Morpurgo Davies Anna 1987 ldquoGreek ΛΕΥΣΣΩ and ΛΕΥΤΟ- An unsolved problemrdquo Minos Revista

de filologia egea NS XXndashXXII = Studies in Mycenaean and Classical Greek Presented to John Chadwick ed by John T Killen Joseacute L Melena Jean-Pierre Olivier 459ndash68

Most Glenn W 1987 ldquoAlcmanrsquos lsquoCosmogonicrsquo Fragment (Fr 5 Page 81 Calame)rdquo Classical Quar-terly NS 371ndash19

Mugler Charles 1964 Dictionnaire historique de la terminologie optique des Grecs douze siegravecles de dialogues avec la lumiegravere Paris

Narten Johanna 1964 Die sigmatischen Aoriste im Veda Wiesbaden mdashmdashmdash 1968 ldquoZum lsquoproterodynamischenrsquo Wurzelprasensrdquo In Pratidanam Indian Iranian and

Indo-European Studies presented to Franciscus B J Kuiper ed by Johannes Cornelis Heesterman Godard Hendrik Schokker V I Subramoniam The Hague Paris 9ndash19

NIL = Wodtko Dagmar S Britta Irslinger and Carolin Schneider 2008 Nomina im indogermani-schen Lexikon Heidelberg

Nussbaum Alan J 1986 Head and Horn in Indo-European Berlin New York mdashmdashmdash 1997 ldquoThe lsquoSaussure Effectrsquo in Latin and Italicrdquo In Sound Law and Analogy Papers in

Honor of Robert S P Beekes on the occasion of his 60th birthday ed by Alexander Lubotsky Amsterdam 181ndash204

mdashmdashmdash 1998 ldquoSevere Problemsrdquo In Miacuter Curad Studies in Honor of Calvert Watkins ed by Jay Jasanoff H Craig Melchert Lisi Oliver Innsbruck 521ndash538

mdashmdashmdash 2010 ldquoPIE -Cmn- and Greek τρumlν5ς lsquoclearrsquordquo In Ex Anatolia Lux Anatolian and Indo-Euro-pean Studies in Honor of H Craig Melchert on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth birthday ed by Ronald Kim Norbert Oettinger Elisabeth Rieken and Michael Weiss Ann Arbor New York 269ndash277

mdashmdashmdash 2013 (forthcoming) ldquoFeminine Abstract Collective Neuter Plural Some remarks on each (Expanded Handout)rdquo In Kollektivum und Femininum Flexion oder Wortbildung Im Anden-ken an Johannes Schmidt ed by Sergio Neri and Roland Schuhmann Leiden

OED = Oxford English Dictionary (electronic resource) Oxford 2000ndash Oettinger Norbert 2002 Die Stammbildung des hethitischen Verbums Dresden OLD = Glare Peter G W ed 1982 Oxford Latin Dictionary Oxford (repr with corrections 1996

[repr 2005]) Perrot Jean 1961 Les derives latins en -men et -mentum Paris Peters Martin 1980 Untersuchungen zur Vertretung der indogermanischen Laryngale im Griechi-

schen Wien Pinault Georges-Jean 2011 ldquoLet Us Now Praise Famous Gemsrdquo TIES 12155ndash220 Reichelt Hans 1914 ldquoStudien zur lat Laut- und Wortgeschichterdquo ZVS 46309ndash350 Rieken Elisabeth 1999 Untersuchungen zur nominalen Stammbildung des Hethitischen Wiesbaden Schaffner Stefan 2001 Das Vernersche Gesetz und der innerparadigmatische grammatische Wech-

sel des Urgermanischen im Nominalbereich Innsbruck Schindler Jochem 1972 Das Wurzelnomen im Arischen und Griechischen Unpublished Wuumlrzburg

dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum

mdashmdashmdash 1975a ldquoZum Ablaut der neutralen s-Staumlmme des Indogermanischenrdquo In Flexion und Wort-bildung Akten der V Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft Regensburg 9 ndash 14 September 1973 ed by Helmut Rix Wiesbaden 259ndash267

mdashmdashmdash 1975b ldquoLrsquoapophonie des thegravemes indo-europeacuteens en -rnrdquo BSL 701ndash10 mdashmdashmdash 1975c ldquoArmenisch erkn griechisch frac34δHνη irisch idurdquo ZVS 8953ndash65 mdashmdashmdash 1976 ldquoDiachronic and Synchronic Remarks on Bartholomaersquos and Grassmannrsquos Lawsrdquo Lin-

guistic Inquiry 7622ndash637 mdashmdashmdash 1977 ldquoA Thorny Problemrdquo Die Sprache 2323ndash35 Schwyzer Eduard 1939 Griechische Grammatik 1 Bd Allgemeiner Teil Lautlehre Wortbildung

Flexion Muumlnchen Skutsch Franz 1909 ldquoArmentumrdquo Glotta 1348 Tedesco Paul 1945 ldquoPersian čīz and Sanskrit kiacutemrdquo Language 21128ndash141 Vollgraff Wilhelm 1929 ldquoInscriptio in arce Argorum repertardquo Mnemosyne 57206ndash234 Wackernagel Jacob 1930 Altindische Grammatik Vol 3 Nominalflexion Zahlwort Pronomen

Goumlttingen Walker Fred W 1889 ldquoPhilological Notes VIIrdquo The Classical Review 3243ndash246 Watkins Calvert 1982 ldquoNotes on the Plural Formations of the Hittite Neutersrdquo In Investigationes

Philologicae et Comparativae Gedenkschrift Heinz Kronasser ed by Erich Neu Wiesbaden 250ndash262

mdashmdashmdash 1986 ldquoThe Name of Meleagerrdquo In o-o-pe-ro-si Festschrift fuumlr Ernst Risch zum 75 Geburtstag ed by Annemarie Etter Berlin New York 320ndash328

Weiss Michael 1993 Studies in Italic Nominal Morphology Unpublished Cornell dissertation mdashmdashmdash 2010 Language and Ritual in Sabellic Italy The Ritual Complex of the Third and the Fourth

Tabulae Iguvinae Leiden Widmer Paul 1997 ldquoZwei keltische t-Staumlmmerdquo HS 110122ndash127 mdashmdashmdash 2004 Das Korn des weiten Feldes Interne Derivation Derivationskette und Flexionsklas-

senhierachie Aspekte der nominalen Wortbildung im Urindogermanischen Innsbruck

Alan J Nussbaum Department of Classics 120 Goldwin Smith Hall Cornell University Ithaca New York 14853-3201 USA ajn8cornelledu


Morphologie Substantiv versus Adjektiv KollektivumAkten der Arbeitstagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft


Herausgegeben vonNorbert Oettinger und Thomas Steer
















Vorwort 7


9ndash23



32ndash50


51ndash64


65ndash77



88ndash102


103ndash112


113ndash128



140ndash163



180ndash194



202ndash204




261ndash272



307ndash317

6




342ndash359





397ndash412


413ndash425


Alan J Nussbaum















1 See Most 1987

216 Alan J Nussbaum






























218 Alan J Nussbaum







In such a usage


















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum



























Vorwort 7


9ndash23



32ndash50


51ndash64


65ndash77



88ndash102


103ndash112


113ndash128



140ndash163



180ndash194



202ndash204




261ndash272



307ndash317

6




342ndash359





397ndash412


413ndash425


Alan J Nussbaum















1 See Most 1987

216 Alan J Nussbaum






























218 Alan J Nussbaum







In such a usage


















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












6




342ndash359





397ndash412


413ndash425


Alan J Nussbaum















1 See Most 1987

216 Alan J Nussbaum






























218 Alan J Nussbaum







In such a usage


















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum













Alan J Nussbaum















1 See Most 1987

216 Alan J Nussbaum






























218 Alan J Nussbaum







In such a usage


















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












216 Alan J Nussbaum






























218 Alan J Nussbaum







In such a usage


















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum




























Most Glenn W 1987 ldquoAlcmanrsquos lsquoCosmogonicrsquo Fragment (Fr 5 1 Calame)rdquo Classical Quar-terly NS 371ndash19














dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum




























218 Alan J Nussbaum







In such a usage


















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum



















there is also












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












220 Alan J Nussbaum























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum
























222 Alan J Nussbaum


























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum

























224 Alan J Nussbaum






















226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum























226 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum



























228 Alan J Nussbaum





























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum



























230 Alan J Nussbaum



































232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum




























232 Alan J Nussbaum

























234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum






















234 Alan J Nussbaum






















236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum

























236 Alan J Nussbaum


















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum





















74 See EWAiaII650

238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












238 Alan J Nussbaum










































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum































240 Alan J Nussbaum













lectives)










sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum














sect172)













242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












242 Alan J Nussbaum

































244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum






























244 Alan J Nussbaum


























(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum

















(sVonhx-oacute-)




831831831831 Hittite


832832832832 Vedic




834834834834 Latin




246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












246 Alan J Nussbaum

835835835835 Germanic























( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum
















( τρχω)












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












248 Alan J Nussbaum
















sidersquo






















250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum





























250 Alan J Nussbaum







lsquobreathrsquo














and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum



















and











252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












252 Alan J Nussbaum











Goth fon)







ON ljoacutemi)





and





and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum
















and









254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












254 Alan J Nussbaum






















256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum
























256 Alan J Nussbaum





















258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum



























258 Alan J Nussbaum










































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum
































dissertation

260 Alan J Nussbaum












260 Alan J Nussbaum












Greek τέκμαρ 'sign' and τέκμωρ 'sign': Why both?

Documents

Transcript of Greek τέκμαρ 'sign' and τέκμωρ 'sign': Why both?