Page images
PDF
EPUB

§ 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 capi 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. όλωλα 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 dos, 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= qv, which is not uncommon.

[ocr errors]

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 process of 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.

of the cognate but subsequent procedure by virtue of which, (1) an existing noun or verb developes itself into a secondary form of the same kind, or (2) two or more distinct words are combined in one, and furnished with a single set of inflexions. This procedure is called word-building, and might be designated as derivation in reference to the materials, and composition in reference to the machinery. Practically, however, we confine the term derivation to the former department; namely, to the developement of secondary words containing only a simple root; while composition is used to denote the subordination of two or more crude forms under the influence of some set of formative appendages and inflexions.

§ 2.

Derivation is merely extended or ulterior inflexion.

In considering the distinction between derivation and inflexion, we must bear in mind, that the former process is really nothing more than an extension of the latter. In forming a word, in the first instance, by the addition of cases or person-endings, we derive our formative materials from the same limited and classified stock of pronominal elements, which furnishes us with the machinery of derivation. Indeed, the new crude form, which becomes the vehicle of the inflexion, is very often neither more nor less than the oblique case of some existing word, and it is probable that this process has been repeated in successive derivations. This remark applies only to derivative nouns, for the new forms of verbs cannot rest upon the inflexions, i. e. personendings, of their primitives. In general, we observe that there is much greater variety in the secondary formations of nouns than in those of verbs. For the person-endings of the latter anticipate the distinctive use of the three pronominal elements in their most prominent and important application, whereas the cases of the noun are connected only with a special developement of the second element, signifying proximity, and transition of agency or the point of motion, and of the third, denoting position and distance. In the derivative forms we find the converse phenomenon: for while the verbs are contented with extensions of their crude form, by pronominal additions limited to that special developement of the second and third elements, which is found in the cases of the noun, and which does not exhibit any direct reference to the primary distinctions of position; in the nouns all three prono

minal elements are used, in their distinctive senses and in combination with one another, to form nominal derivatives, which may be extended by successive accretions to a considerable length of after-growth. A verb in the finite moods must always be distinguished by person-endings, which cannot become the vehicle of ulterior formations; and, for the same reason, all pronominal elements, which might be mistaken for person-endings by retaining the original distinctions, are excluded, in the verb, from the function of extending the crude form, which they exercise in the derivative nouns, both when they are and when they are not identical with the case-affixes of the primitive words.

§ 3. (I.) Derived Nouns.

It is not always possible to assign a definite meaning to all the elements or combinations of elements, which contribute to the extension of the crude form in Latin nouns; but so far as we can arrive at the signification of the affix, we can see that the distinctive use of the pronouns is preserved in this application; namely, that the first pronominal element expresses that the thing proceeds from, or immediately belongs to, the subject; the second, that it has a relation to the subject; the third, that it is a mere object, or something removed from the proximity of the subject. We also observe that the combinations of these elements are regulated by the same principle as that which explains their use in prepositions and other independent words; namely, "that if any one of the elements of position is combined with -ra, an ultimate form of the third element, it indicates motion and continuation in a direction of which the element in question represents the point nearest to the subject; and that by subjoining any one of the pronominal elements to any other of them, we denote a motion or continuation from the position signified by the first element towards that indicated by the second, and so on, if the combination involves more than two." (New Crat. § 169).

§ 4. (a) Forms with the first Pronominal Element only.

There are comparatively few Latin nouns in -ma or -mus, which express an action as immediately proceeding from the subject: such are fa-ma, "a speaking" (root fa-), flam-ma, "a burning" (root flag-), tra-ma, "a drawing" (root trah-),

ani-mus, "a blowing," ar-mus, "a joining," re-mus (root ret- or rot-) "a turning round" (in the water), i. e. "a rowing thing," al-mus, "a nourisher," pri-mus, "the first of a series beginning with the subject," &c.

§ 5. (b) Forms with the second Pronominal Element only.

The second element, under one or other of its various modifications, contributes most largely to the formation of derivative nouns. A great number of these are abstract or qualitative terms, and they differ from those in -ma and -mus by their more general and relative predication. For all those formed by the first element only may be translated as expressing the subject of action, and some of them, as re-mus, al-mus, cannot be regarded as mere abstractions. mere abstractions. Whereas the nouns, which exhibit the second element as their termination, always depart from the idea of a subject or agent, and express only an agency or quality, like the English words in -ness, -hood, -y, &c. Sometimes the second element appears under a guttural form, as in vo-c-s (vox)," a voice" or "speaking" (Sanser. hve, cf. Boń, n-xń, &c.); and to this class belongs the copious list of adjectives in -cus, -i-cus, ac-s (=ax), &c., denoting quality or disposition, as civi-cus from civis, ami-cus from amo, loqu-a-x from loquor, &c. But by far the most common form of the second element, in its use as an affix, is that in which the guttural is vocalized to i Besides the numerous words in -ia, -ius, -ea, -eus, -ium, -is, as grat-ia from grat-us, mod-ius from mod-us, pic-ea from pix, calc-eus from calc-s, consil-ium from consul, febr-is from ferv-eo, nubes nube-is from nubo, materies=mater-ia-is from mater, &c., it seems reasonable to infer that the masculine nouns in a, together with some feminines, involve vocalized gutturals; for we cannot otherwise account for the formation of such words as scrib-ă, notă, agri-cola, &c., as compared with the Greek κριτής, τιμή, συκέα, and Tauías, than by supposing an omission of the extenuated i=y: thus scrib-a-scrib-yas will be legitimately formed from scribo, nota-not-ya-no-tia, will properly correspond to Tun, &c. in Greek, and to amici-tia, &c. in Latin. We may also compare ad-vena=ad-ven-ya-s with ad-venio. That such an extenuation is possible is shown by the transference of Zwvn, &c. into zonă, &c. (above, p. 295). We have also seen that the affix i lies more or less hid in some nouns of the third declension,

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »