A grammar of the Homeric dialect - Wilbourhall.org

106 NOUN FORMATION. [lI4*.
-v(T-ia) seem to represent the original gradation ;
but the T of
the Masc. and Neut. oblique cases is peculiar to Greek,, as the
nasal to Sanscrit. If we suppose a primitive declension (e. g.)
Fi$-Fu>s, Ace. Fib-F^xr-a, Gen. Ftb-vcros, &c. this might become
Ace. Fib-F6ar-a, Gen. Fi$-F6cr-os, &c. (by the same levelling which
we have in bu>-T(*>p,
Ace. 6co-rop-a, Gen. 8a>-rop-os), then Ace.
Fti-Fo-a, Gen. Fib-Fo-os &c. At this stage the endings -oY-oj,
-o'r-a &c. may have been introduced through analogy perhaps
of the Pres. Part. However this
may be, this is one of several
instances in Nominal Declension of T creeping in to form a Stem
for the oblique Cases.
7. A Suffix which originally was closely parallel to the -fco?
of the Pf . is to be seen in the -Iw or -IWK of the Comparative ;
Sanscr. -yams, -yas, (-is),
Greek -wv, -toy, -to- (in -LCT-TOS).
Here
the v,
in spite of the Sanscr. nasal, is as difficult to explain
as the T of the Pf . However the older endings -o-a, -o-cs (for
-oa-a, -OCT-CS) are preserved in the Ace. Sing. Masc. and Nom.
and Ace. Plur. Neut. (d/xetVco for a^iv-ocr-a), and the Nom.
Plur. (afjiivovs } &c.). In the Latin -ior, -ior-is, &c. there is no
trace of a nasal. We may compare the variation in atcor,
KVKZUV (107 ad Jin}*.
8. Heteroclite forms occur when different Suffixes are brought
into a single declension. In particular
(a) Suffixes ending in -v interchange with Suffixes in -p.
Thus we find TTIODV, Gen. KIOV-OS fat, but Fern. irUipa (irl-Fep-ia)
and the Neut. Substantive iriap fatness. Also xeijutou,
but
XLfjip-Los. (Cp. the ~La,t. femur, femin-is, &nd.jec-ur, jecin-or-is,
which is for an older jecin-is.)
(#) Similarly along with TJWS we have yep-Los at dawn, and the
Adv. ripi (Sanscr.
ushas and ushdr).
(e) Final T is introduced in the Suffix; as in fjira-T-os (for
f)irv-T-os, cp. the Sanscr. yakrt, Gen. yakn-as, and the other
*
The suffixes of the Pf. Part. Act. and the Comparative have lately been
the subject of much controversy: see Brugmann, K. Z, xxiv. 79 ff., Grundr.
!35j "36, pp. 403, 417 Joh.
; Schmidt, K. Z. xxvi. 341 ff., 378 ff., Pluralb. p.
157 ; Collitz, Bezz. Beitr. x. 25, 63. The chief difficulty lies in the nasal of the
Sanscrit strong Cases. Such a gradation as -vons (or -vens), -ves, -us, or -ions,
-ios (or ies), -is, is unexampled. Joh. Schmidt takes the nasalised forms
(Sanscr. -vdms-, -lams') as his point of departure, but has been unable to explain
-is to the satisfaction of other scholars. Those who assume a
-vas, -ias, -us,
primitive -vos, -ids have hitherto been equally unsuccessful in accounting for
The explanation of the r of -OT-OS, &c. is
Sanscr. -vams, -iams and Greek -J.GOV.
also difficult, but there it is at least certain that it is of secondary origin. It
is to be noted that the traces of -uxr in the Comparative are confined to strong
Cases, as Ace. Sing. -o