§ 11.

Adverbs considered as Cases of Nouns.

If now we add to the observations derived from the actual cases of nouns, the additional phenomena furnished by the adverbs, the subject of this chapter will have received all the examination of which it is capable.

Adverbs are, properly speaking, certain cases of pronouns and nouns, and under particular circumstances they are deduced from the participles or supines of verbs. Their syntactical use is as secondary predicates, inasmuch as they convey predication only through the verb of the sentence. The Greeks employ their adjectives and participles for this purpose without any additional inflexion; but the Roman adverbs are always cases, and sometimes, if one may use the expression, double or superimposed cases of nominal or pronominal forms.

Pronominal adverbs are secondary predicates either of place or of time. The former indicate (a) “locality,” in which case they generally exhibit the locative endings -bi and -im or the accusative -m thus, from the demonstrative is and the relative qui, we have i-bi and u-bi, originally cubi, comp. ali-cubi, &c.; from iste we have istim, &c.; and the ending -m appears in us-quam or uspiam, &c.;-(b) "motion towards," in which case they end in -o as ul-tro, "to a place beyond" (see Döderlein, Syn. u. Etym. III. pp. 105, sqq.); quo, "whither;" eo, "thither;" &c.; sometimes -c is appended: thus we have illuc, istuc, by the side of illo, isto;-(c) "motion from," in which case the ending is -nde, or -nce, -nque: thus we have i-nde from is, [c]u-nde from qui, aliu-nde from alius, hi-ne from hi-c, illi-nc from ille, utri-nque from uter ;-(d) "the way," in which case we have a feminine ablative in -á agreeing with viâ understood, as quá, câ, &c. The forms of class (c) deserve some special remark. The comparison of tum with tunc shows that the n would have been written m, if the c had not been appended. And the same remark applies to exin-de, hin-c, illin-c, istin-c: for exim occurs in Lucretius, (see Lachmann on III. 161), and Ritschl has claimed illim and istim for the text of Plautus (Rhein. Mus. 1850. pp. 472, sqq.). But this does not interfere with the inference that the accusative and locative m is the representative of an original dental. There can be no doubt that the termination -de is identical with that of the ablative, and, as we have seen, with the termination -tus. Bopp, who was aware

of this (Vergl. Gramm. p. 610), proposes to consider the same letter as included in hinc, illinc, istinc, which he regards as corruptions of hinde, illinde, istindc. I should not desire any other proof of the importance of the distinction which I first introduced into the analysis of the pronominal elements (New Crat. 130). According to the principle which regulates all combinations of these elements, n+c denotes motion "from the there to the here," and therefore expresses ablation or removal quite as naturally as the affix -de-tus, which is in fact ultimately referable to the same source (N. Crat. § 262).

Pronominal adverbs of time generally end in -m, as tum, quum; in nc, -nque, as tu-nc, cu-nque; or in -ndo, -nquam, as qua-ndo, nu-nquam.

Adverbs derived from nouns adjective and substantive either end in e, o, or ter; or else they are merely adjectives in the neuter objective case.

(a) Adverbs in e or o, anciently ending in -ed, or -od, are, in fact, ablative cases of adjectives: thus valde, originally validod; bene, originally bonod; cito, originally citod; certe or certo, originally certod, &c., are the ablative cases of validus, bonus, citus, certus, &c. respectively. The Greeks had a large class of adverbs of the same kind; but in these the final -d of the ablative has been softened down, according to the laws of Hellenism, into an -s: thus, ouтws, кaλws, &c. represent the old forms of the ablative, ouтod, kaλód, &c. (see N. Crat. § 249). There are two cases where this d- seems still to exist, id-tos and 'Appod-irn (Sanser. Abhrâd-itâ); and there is one instance in which the metre of Homer will not allow its modern representative to stand, namely, in those passages where ews is a trochee. The Sanscrit tâ-vat compared with TéFws might justify the supposition that the original form was aFod; while the analogy of λaFós, λéFws, vάos, véws, should authorise us to insert, even in our Hellenic text of Homer, the emendation &Fos for ews (comp. also Hws, Avws, "Ews), whenever this particle is a trochee1.

1 There can be little doubt that ews and rews correspond to yâvat and távat respectively. Now as, by the side of Xéws, we have λaFós and Xas, so by the side of ews we have as (Pind. O. XI. 51; Aristoph. Lysistr. 173), which was also written Fâs (Tab. Heracl. 2, 52, p. 207); and we may therefore infer the intermediate form åƑos = åƑod=yá-vat.

(b) The termination -ter is appended to adjectives of the

third declension in the same way as -} [d] is affixed to adjectives

of the first and second declension. Thus, from lenis we have leni-ter; from gravis, gravi-ter; from felix, felici-ter; from audax, audac-ter; from difficilis, difficul-ter; and so on. Το these must be added the isolated form igi-tur, which, according to Festus, (p. 105, Müller) is equivalent to inde, postea, tum (above, p. 204). The first two syllables i-gi must be taken to represent the composite forms e-go, e-ho, e-ja, &c. and as the Umbrian es-te represents the Latin i-ta, so i-gi- may correspond to es-ga-er-ga, which is strictly a synonym of i-gi-tur. The termination -ter, -tur, is, in fact, the same as -tus, which is appended to substantives and adjectives of the second declension: thus we have cœli-tus, fundi-tus, radici-tus, antiqui-tus, divini-tus, humani-tus, &c. This last, which is obviously the older form, answers to the Sanscrit -tas, -thas, -das, -dhas, on the one hand, and to the Greek -Oev on the other (compare the Greek first person plural in -uev with the Latin in -mus). There is yet a third form in which it appears, namely, -tim, which is the termination of a most interesting class of participial adverbs; for I cannot consent to consider any of them as strictly formed from nouns; and though the verbs in all cases are not forthcoming, the adverbs themselves prove that they must have existed in part at least. Instances of this class of adverbs are caterva-tim, carp-tim, grada-tim, priva-tim, punc-tim, separatim, vica-tim. Compare with these the German participial forms in -ingen, and the Greek participial adverbs in -vda, -vonv, -Sny (N. Crat. § 263). The most striking result from a proper appreciation of the origin of adverbs in tim, is the explanation which it supplies for those adverbs in -ter which are derived from active participles. The termination of the supine is already -tu; the adverb, therefore, is a locative case of the supine; for caterva-tim stands to caterva-tus in precisely the same relation as par-tim to pars (par[t]s). Similarly, aman-ter, sapien-ter, &c. are cases of the participles amans, sapiens, &c.; for the crude forms of these participles already contain the t. Now, if I am right in concluding that these terminations, -Oev, -dhas, -ter, -tus, tim, &c. are lengthened forms of that dental affix which marks the ablative of the noun, most interesting conclusions

may be drawn from this respecting the origin of the participle and of the passive person-endings of the Latin verb: for if the dental, which must be added to the noun to form the ablative case or adverb, is already included in the participle, it follows that the crude form of the participle is already an ablative formation. That there is no essential distinction between the terminations -tim and -ter, and that the former is not restricted to participles of the passive formation, is clear from such forms as pede-tentim, &c. In fact, while the -d or -t alone are sufficient to express the ablative and participial relation (as in cupi-dus-cupiens; the terminations -dov, -dny, by the side of -vdov, -vdny; the participle TETUDÓT[-ws] by the side of TUTTOVT-; and the adverbs in -tus by the side of those in -nde, both signifying "motion from "= "ablation"), yet we must admit that the strengthened form of the active participle, which contains the liquid as well as the mute dental, is no less ablative than those forms in which the mute appears alone; for there is no less opposition between i-bi and inde from i-s, than between αὐτόθι and αὐτόθεν from autó-s1. The participle, therefore, is an ablative or adverbial formation from a verbal root, expressing that which comes out of the action of a verb, i. e. the manner of it; and differs only from these adverbs, and from the persons of the verb, in the circumstance, that it is not an immoveable form, but one which is capable of regular flexion through the whole system of cases (N. Crat. §§ 300, 415).

Adverbs, used as conjunctions, are such as jam (from is), enim (Sanscr. éna), ideo, tamen, igitur, &c. These are, in fact, cases of different pronouns. Most of them are of obvious origin:

1 In the text I have merely put together some of the analogies suggested in my former work. The late Mr. Garnett, who was one of the soundest, and, at the same time, most original philologers in this country, had arrived at some results which were calculated to confirm and extend these views. In a letter to me (dated 3d May, 1842) he said: "I flatter myself that I can make it appear from a pretty copious induction that the Indo-Germanic present participle is formed upon the ablative case of the verbal noun [Sanscrit tupat], in much the same way as the pronoun possessive in Latin, German, &c., is formed upon the genitive of the personal. If I am not mistaken, this is calculated to throw an important light upon the organization of the Indo-Germanic and many other languages."

ideo (comp. adeo) is equivalent to the Greek éπítηdes (= Éπi Tádeo, Buttmann), and from it is derived idoneus = ideoneus = Gr. EπITýdeιos. Igitur is either the case in -tur (= tus, -Oev) from a pronoun which is found in Oscan, under the form of esa, the soft Latin g representing the sound of s or z, or it is the locative of the third pronoun strengthened by a prefix equivalent to the combination e-ho, e-go, which is found with similar adjuncts, especially in the case of i-s-te, the first syllable of which includes the same elements as i-gi, and e-ho. In old Latin its signification was inde, "out of that" (Festus, p. 105; above, Chapter. VI. §7), which is the usual force of the termination -tus = θεν, οι thereupon," which agrees with the other analysis of igitur, with the use of -tur in the third person passive, and with the obvious meaning of e-s-te in Umbrian.

Some adverbs are merely cases of common nouns, which usage has made indeclinable. These appear sometimes as conjunctions, and sometimes as prepositions. Instar, gratiâ, and ergo, may be compared with δίκην, χάριν, and ἕνεκα (see New Crat. §§ 271, sqq.). Prope[d] (cf. propin-quus) is the ablative of an old adjective, and prop-ter is its case in -ter=tus=0ev. Penes and tenus are forms of the same kind as instar, and contain the roots of pen-dere, ten-dere. Clam and palam are locatives of the same nature as partim, &c. The former, which was also written calim (Fest. p. 47), contains the root of celo, κλέπτω, καλύπτω, &c. Palam is the same case of an adjective connected with palatum, rúλn, &c. That it is a noun appears farther from the fact, that it is used also with the preposition in (in palam aperte, Gloss. Isid.), like in-cassum; comp. propalam. The same is the case with coram co'oram (κaт' oμμα); comp. co'minus, e’minus (èk xeɩpós). Sometimes the adverb is merely the crude form of the noun. We have examples of this in simul, procul (from similis, procilis); and the ancients wrote facul (Fest. p. 87) and perfacul (id. p. 214) for faculter or facile, and perfacile. Again, the full form of the noun is occasionally used as an adverb: in the XII. Tables we have nox for noctu (above, p. 216); and Virgil (Æn. I. 215; VII. 624) and other writers use pars for partim. There is an approximation to this usage in the indeclinable Greek Oéuis (Buttmann, Ausf. Sprachl. I. p. 227).

=

=