Pronomen Abundans and Pronomen Coniunctum. A ... - DWC

112 PRONOMEN ABUNDANS AND PRONOMEN CONIUNCTUM
ginning) and also used the pronomen abundans I coniunctum af ter both
of them. It was the unnatural way of thinking of writers, who had artificially
revived the traditional relat. pronoun.
7.2.3.2. Relat. pronoun ~ connective
In 7.3.1.1 it has been maintained that the relat. pronoun was revived,
so much that it sometimes even makes the impression of having the
strength of a demonstr. pronoun. This is contrary to something that has
been asserted earlier, viz. that the relat. pronoun had been reduced to
a connective. That this is a true fact has been made clear in instances
discussed in 5.3.2 and 5.3.6. Yet, these two phenomena can exist next to
each other. We have to keep in mind that the reduction of the relat.
pronoun is real and the result of a natural development in the living
language, whereas its revival is something artificial: in reality the relat.
pronoun remained as weak as it was. This becomes clear especially in
cases occurring in the later texts, where we find phrases as 1-'11 olç and
offev, and forms of oç(nç) and oanee evidently used as substitutes for
onov, a word which principally is just as fossilized 419.
7.2.3.3. Later examples ot the pronomen abundans
In 2.4. etc. we have seen that the pronomen abundans was not extinct
af ter all. It emerges again in the Alchimiae apparatio (14th cent.), in the
Byz. Alexander-poem (14th cent.) and in the Ohronicle of Sphrantzes
(15th cent.). For what reason is it used there, af ter such a long time
of successful repression 1
7.2.3.3.1. Alchimiae apparatio. It has been already observed in 2.4.5
that the instances of the pronomen abundans occun'ing in these recipes
must be considered as a consequence of the substitution of onee for onov.
Consequently it is bet ter to view them as cases of the pronomen coniunctum.
The only traditional relat. pronoun used by the author is a (fossilized)
onee 420. For the rest he employs ónov 421, ó nOloç 422 and the so-called
postpositive article 423 . In this he differs completely from the author of
the Byz. Alexander-poem and Sphrantzes, who use only the traditional
pronouns.
7.2.3.3.2. In the examples from the Byz. Alexander-poem (see 2.4.2) we
observe that the author of th is work had no notion any longer of how
to use the traditional relat. pronouns. The effect of the revival has lost
419 See 5.3.6 and note 377, and 5.5 (p. 107).
420 See 5.3.6.
421 'OnoV is only employed in essential clauses. Instances occur in D2, 11, 20,
E21, K9 and M15.
422 '0 noioç is used only in cases of relat. connection, preferably combined with
a noun: C9 (ónola fPláÀTJ), Cll (ónoioç nTJÀóç) F6 (óno{a aEÀTJVTJ), H14 (tlç 5nowv vEe6v) ,
017 (rà ónoia fPVÀÀa) .
423 It occurs only once, in L17 (r:6).