pro-fic-i-scor, "I cause myself to set forth," i. e. "I set out," and the perfect profectus sum falls back on the form of the primitive participle. Some consonantal verbs strengthen the present with i before they assume the inchoative affix; thus, from gemo, we have gem-i-sco, from tremo, trem-i-sco, from vivo, re-viv-i-sco (perf. revixi); from the root nac, na-n-c-iscor, nactus sum, from pa-n-go, pac-i-scor, pactus sum. The peculiar verb ob-liv-i-scor (from livor, liveo, livescor) meaning “I make a black mark for myself," "I obliterate," "I forget," has the perfect ob-li-tus sum. The forms which I have mentioned have either simply verbal roots, or corresponding verbs without this affix. But there are some which are apparently derived from substantives, as arbor-e-sco, ir-a-scor, puer-a-sco, tener-a-sco, &c. It must be clear, however, to any philologer, that we must in these cases assume an intermediate verb in -ya (=ao or eo). And while we find this supported in particular cases by substantives and adjectives like arbor-e-tum, i-r-ā-tus, &c., the fact, that there must have been many such vowel-verbs which are now extinct, is shown by the appearance of many adjectives in -atus, -itus, -utus, derived from nouns, but with the meaning of passive participles; such as barba-tus, "bearded," auri-tus, "long-eared," cornu-tus, "horned," and many adverbs in tim, with an active participial meaning, as catervā-tim, "troopingly," furtim, "stealingly," &c. (above, p. 289). The passive form of these participial words implies that the vowel-verb, to which they are referred, is transitive, and in point of fact we find that cre-sco, "I am being made," stands in this relation to creo; see Virg. Georg. II. 336: "prima crescentis origine mundi." With singular inconsistency, Bopp, who cannot see any agglutinate form in the verbs in so, -sivi, in the very next page assumes that these inchoatives include esco the obsolete future of the substantive verb, quite overlooking the fact that this form also remains to be accounted for, and that it cannot be explained otherwise than by concluding that esco-es-sco is the inchoative of es-um, Sanscr. as-mê. For my own part, I have not the least doubt that sc in these Latin inchoatives, in the corresponding Greek verbs in -ʊkw, and in the iterative or inchoative tenses in -σkov, is a pronominal affix, springing from a repetition of the idea of proximity (New Crat. §§ 386, 7). Whether we say at once that s+c is a junction of two forms of the same element, like the common endings n+t, t+n, or identify it with the affix sy found in the Sanscrit future, and in the Greek and Latin desideratives, the result will be the same, for s-i-k come to an ultimate agreement as forms of the second pronominal element. As pronominal elements and their combinations appear also as verb-roots (as e. g. μev- in μévw, Oa- in Ti0nui, &c.), we shall have no difficulty in recognising the reduplication sc, with its inchoative and iterative meaning, in "a large class of words of which the general idea is that of the inequality of the limbs" (Kenrick, Herod. p. 24), or rather which denote progression by successive steps; such as okéλos, sca-ndo, &c. § 9. B. Abbreviated forms. Most of the abbreviated forms, or the verbs which are liable to syncope in certain of their inflexions, have received sufficient notice already. Possum for potis-sum or pot'sum is merely an assimilation. The perfect pot-ui may be referred to the same class as the other agglutinate perfects. The omission of d in certain inflexions of edo belongs to an analogy which is particularly observable in the Romance languages (above, pp. 256,7). The same may be said of vis for volis, malo for mage'volo, &c. There are, however, some etymological peculiarities about fero, which deserve a special examination, independently of the fact that it borrows its perfect tuli for tetuli, and its participle latus for tlatus or toltus, from the root of tollo, tolyo or tlao. No difficulty is suggested by an immediate comparison of fer-o with the Greek pép-w, Sanser. bhri, O. H. G. bar, Engl. "bear." But even without comparative philology it has been seen that fer-o must be connected with fer-io and fendo; thus Müller supports his reading, diffensus, in Festus, p. 272 (Suppl. Annot. p. 401, above, p. 207), by referring to the use of offendo, defendo, infensus, infestus, confestim, “quibus illud ostenditur synonymum fuisse feriendo et trudendo," and he adds, "quod posteriorum temporum usu diceretur: eam ob caussam dies differetur: majore cum vi, nec sine emphasi quadam sic pronunciabatur: EO DIES DIFFENSUS ESTO." But if diffendo differo, of course fendo=fero. With regard to the adjectives infensus and infestus, which are so often confused, while offensus, from offendo, shows that the former is connected with in-fendo, a comparison of mani-festus, fest-ino, proves that in-festus is the old and genuine participle of in-fero. The = σαντε. meaning of these apparently synonymous words is quite in accordance with this etymology; for while infensus denotes an unfriendly or angry disposition of the mind, and so corresponds to iratus, inimicus, on the other hand, infestus always signifies some outward opposition or attack, so that it answers to adversus, hostilis. Hence we find in the same passage of Livy (II. 6): "concitat calcaribus equum, atque in ipsum infestus consulem dirigit.... adeoque infensis animis concurrerunt, ut.... duabus hærentes hastis moribundi ex equis lapsi sint," where the “infensis animis" implies the animosity with which they were actuated; and the infestus the direct charge full tilt against the adversary; as in the parallel description of the fight between the two brothers in Sophocles (Antig. 145) they are described not only as στυγεροί, but also as καθ ̓ αὑτοῖν δικρατεῖς λόγχας στή σavтe. If we admit the affinity of ferio and fero, we shall see at once that the former, which is the secondary form, merely exhibits the adjunct ya, and the idea of striking is intimately connected with that of lifting, bearing, carrying; for a blow is nothing more than a weight or momentum brought to bear on some object: hence, the earliest weapon of offence is naturally termed a ρόπαλον from ῥέπω, just as the instrument of protection is called onλov from enw (New Crat. § 259). The connexion between fendo and fero is not so obvious. When we recollect the affinity between hir, hri, χείρ, αρ-πάζω, κάρπος, aip-éw, and yév-to, hinthan, can-is, “hand," "hound," yavdárw, pre-hendo (New Crat. §§ 162, 281), we see at once the possibility of a community of origin in fero and fendo. And as we cannot explain the 8 or th in either case as a mere adjunct to the root, we must not be led by the actual change of r into n, in some of these forms, to the conclusion that this change has taken place in hendo and fendo. As in the case of xa-v-dá-vw, it is more in accordance with scientific reasoning to suppose that the n is here an anusvára or euphonic nasal; and the insertion of this sound would naturally introduce the medial d before r, as in av-d-pós, ven-d-re-di, &c. But, as we have seen, the Latin r has a natural tendency to commutation with d. Consequently, its absorption or assimilation in hend-o, fend-o, would follow as a matter of course. And thus fer-o, fen-d-o, and fer-io, establish their claim to be considered as members of the same fer-tile stock. § 10. Defective Verbs. The epithet "defective" is applied to verbs with a very restricted signification. Properly speaking, all impersonal verbs are defective in the 1st and 2nd persons, and all neuter and deponent verbs are defective in voice, except when the former are defective in person. But it is customary to restrict the term defective to those verbs which are specially incomplete in the machinery of their conjugation. Some of these are really only irregular appendages of existing verbs. Thus cæpi is the usual perfect of in-cipio, memini of reminiscor; ausim and faxim are obsolete tenses of audeo and facio, and the former of these, with gaudeo, fido, and soleo, has no perfect of the active form; quæso, quæsumus are the original articulations of quæro, quærimus; forem and fore are used with sum and fui. Some few verbs are employed in a sort of interjectional sense in the imperative only, as apage, cedo, &c.; others, as vale, which are thus used, appear also as regular verbs. Odi, "I hate," "I have conceived a dislike," is the intransitive perfect of a lost deponent, corresponding to the Greek ὀδύσσομαι (cf. ὄλωλα from ὄλλυμαι, &c.) ; this deponent form exists in the compound participles exosus and perosus. We can have no difficulty in understanding the parenthetical use which gradually reduced the oldest verbs of "speaking," aio, inquam, and fari, to a few of their commonest inflexions. We have the same result in the Greek dös, and in our "quoth," which, as has been remarked above (p. 112), exists as an independent verb only in the compound "be-queath," and which contains the same root as in-quam. The forms of the imperfect and future (in-quiebam, in-quies), and the diphthong in the derivative quæ-roquai-sino, show that the root in-quam must have contained something more than a mere vowel of articulation, and that it was probably strengthened by the semi-vowel i It therefore stands on a different footing from sum, the only other verb which retains the first person-ending in the present; for here the is a mere sh'va like that in Hercules (above, p. 266): cf. as-mi and éo-uí. In the by-form in-fit we have f= qu, which is not uncommon. CHAPTER XIII. DERIVATION AND COMPOSITION. § 1. A. Derivation. General principles. § 2. Derivation is merely extended, or ulterior inflexion. § 3. (I.) Derivative nouns. § 4. (a) Forms with the first pronominal element only. § 5. (b) Forms with the second pronominal element only. § 6. (c) Forms with the third pronominal element only. § 7. (a) Terminations compounded of the first and other pronominal elements. § 8. (B) Terminations compounded of the second and other pronominal elements. § 9. (y) The third pronominal element compounded with others and reduplicated. § 10. (II.) Derived verbs. § 11. B. Discrimination of compound words. § 12. Classification of Latin compounds. THE § 1. A. Derivation. General principles. HE term derivation was once used to denote the of process guess-work by which the etymology of a word was ascertained, and it was formerly thought that the most satisfactory derivation of a Latin word was that which consisted in its direct deduction from some Greek word of similar sound'. The student of scientific or comparative philology does not need to be told that, although the Greek and Latin languages have a common element, or are traceable, in part at least, to a common source, their mutual relationship is collateral, and not in the direct line of descent, and that in these and other old languages of the Indo-Germanic family "derivation is, strictly speaking, inapplicable, farther than as pointing out the manner in which certain constant syllables, belonging to the pronominal or formative element of inflected languages, may be prefixed or subjoined to a given form for the expression of some secondary or dependent relation” (New Crat. Pref. 1st Ed.). According to this view, derivation includes a department of what is called word-building ( Wort-bildung), so far as this is distinguished from mere inflexion. The modifications of the noun and verb, by which inflected language is characterised, belong indifferently to all forms, whether primary or derived, whether simple or compound. And after considering these formations, the grammarian naturally passes on to an investigation 1 Döderlein is perhaps the last representative of this school, and some of his derivations (e. g. fraus from yeûdos!) are equal to the worst attempts of his predecessors. |