Sigmatic Aorist Research Articles

On the Imperfect ἐβίβασκεν (Homeric Hymn to Apollo 133) and the Causative Forms of the Paradigm of βαίνω

Abstract The imperfect ἐβίβασκεν (h.Ap. 133) has generally been considered an Ionic imperfect of βίβημι / βιβάω. However, its morphosemantic characteristics instead suggest an imperfect of βιβάσκω, a derivative of the former with the suffix -σκω. This present is used in the classical period with a causative value, but in the archaic period was documented in an inchoative sense. This evolution forms part of the development of a causative present corresponding to the sigmatic aorist of βαίνω that involved different formations until the creation of βιβάζω.

The use of the modal particle with the subjunctive in the main clauses in the Odyssey.

In this article, I will address the use of the modal particle (MP) with the subjunctive in the main clauses in the Odyssey. I choose this feature, because this is a usage that is unknown to Attic and even in Ionic this is extremely rare. I first explain how the corpus was obtained, as the forms described as “future indicatives” in the grammars of Classical Greek descend either from the Indo-European desiderative and will be called “future-desideratives” here, or are metrically equivalent to the subjunctive of the sigmatic aorist, and as in the vast majority of cases, the distinction between desiderative and aorist subjunctive cannot be made, these forms are catalogued as “future-subjunctives”. In a second step, I discuss some of the textual issues that could arise in determining whether or not the MP was in fact attested. Thirdly, I outline a working hypothesis, outlining that the MP refers to single and specific action close to hearer and speaker and is only allowed with the epistemic modality (as in Allan’s 2013 framework). Fourthly, I provide the fact and figures and then, I start with the actual analysis. I find that there are no “future-desideratives” with an MP in the Odyssey and that only a very limited number of (future-)subjunctives are used with an MP in the main clause. This is due to the fact that most of these forms have a desiderative, voluntative and/or exhortative meaning, which are all three incompatible with the use of the MP. Besides the passages where the rules seem to be observed, I also discuss those in which the rules seem to have been violated, there are different variants attested or more than one interpretation possible.

Old Lithuanian <em>ischtirra</em> ‘found out’ and some notes on the development of Baltic preterit

The starting point for our considerations on the development of the Baltic preterite is the Old Lithuanian preterite /istira:/ ‘found out’, etymologically connected to týrė ‘examined’. In form, /istira:/ and týrė match the Old Church Slavonic otьre (thematic aorist) and trь (sigmatic aorist). This, in turn, is an argument for the hypothesis proposed by Daniel Petit (2004) on the origin of the lengthening in the Baltic preterite. The second part of this paper discusses the traces of a coexistence of inflected aspect (based on the contrast of the past tenses of aorist : imperfect) and derivational aspect (based on the opposition of perfective : imperfective) in Lithuanian.

Historical Development of the Old Church Slavonic tŭ-aorist

The present paper investigates the historical development of the Old Church Slavonic tŭ (tъ)-aorist, which is restricted to the 2nd and 3rd singular forms in the place of person and number inflection, and to some resonant stem in the domain. Crucial issues, such as (i) how to classify those anomalous aorists, (ii) what morphological status to be assigned to the specific morpheme –tъ, and (iii) how to motivate it, have not reached agreed-upon conclusion, have been addressed with a detailed preliminary study of the aorist system in Old Church Slavonic. First, I suppose that either the time span between developments of root aorist and sigmatic aorist was so short or the overlapping period was so long that two distinct formations can be seen as subject to a single rule. Therefore, there is no contradiction in using terms like sigmatic-root and sigmatic-dental aorists. That is, tъ-aorist does not necessarily have to be rigorously classified either as root or as sigmatic aorist. Second, the consonant t in this specific aorist, cognate with the Germanic dental preterite (Meillet 1902), is in and of itself fitting with the tense denoting purpose. Third, the fact that the phoneme –t(+V)- was used fairly throughout the 2/3 Sg, Du, and Pl verbal paradigms provides motivates the use of tъ. In addition, Late Common Slavic speakers must have felt the need of filling the zero suffixes for 2/3 Sg aorists with something to make the forms more like a real word.

The development of the sigmatic aorist in Armenian

The development of the sigmatic aorist in Armenian

Aorist voice patterns in the diachrony of Greek

Abstract This paper deals with the aorist voice system in NT Greek and focuses on middle-passive markers, namely middle inflection, e.g. in the middle sigmatic aorist, and affixes -η-/-θη-, in the so-called passive aorist. The research is corpus-based and investigates the occurrences of ca. 1800 verbal items. According to the grammarians, in the NT both middle and passive aorists spread. The present study confirms this observation by providing a comprehensive account of the distribution of these forms, but also shows how they have functionally reorganised. Passive aorists spread at the expense of middle aorists in all kinds of intransitive constructions, namely passive, unaccusative, and reflexive, whereas middle aorists are either found in transitive middles, e.g. possessive, benefactive etc., or occur as deponent verbs in both transitive and intransitive clauses. The parameter transitive vs intransitive appears to be relevant for this functional reorganisation.

Unknown Аrchaic Тranslation of Sermon 5 from John of Sinaya’s Scala Paradisi, in a Serbian Manuscript from the 14th Century

The subject of this research is an unknown Slavic translation of Sermon 5 John of Sinaya’s Scala Paradisi (Lestvica) in a Serbian Menaion and Triodion Panagyric, rewritten from an old Bulgarian antigraph which has preserved the archaic grammatical traits of the prototranslation. In the sermon’s text, forms of asigmatic aorist and first sigmatic aorist with a preserved “s” are being registered, as well as non-contrahered forms for imperfect, forms of past active I participle formed with suffix -ьш- from verbs with a base ending on -и-, possessive adjectives as a translation of the Greek genitive case for possession, usage of a local prepositionless, excessive prepositionless usage of ablative case, descriptive future with a preponderance of forms of хотѣти + infinitive, dual number forms, non-contrahered forms of complex (determinative) adjectives, etc. The translation of the sermon of the transcript in NHM24 includes rare lexemes that attribute it to the early translations of Cyril and Methodius. It demonstrates similarities to the Glagolitic translations of the hand-written cannon of 10th–11th century.

Accent and Ablaut in the Vedic Verb

Most scholars nowadays reconstruct a static root present with an alternation between lengthened grade in the active singular and full grade in the active plural and in the middle. I am unhappy about this traditional methodology of loosely postulating long vowels for the proto-language. What we need is a powerful theory which explains why clear instances of original lengthened grade are so very few and restrains our reconstructions accordingly. Such a theory has been available for over a hundred years now: it was put forward by Wackernagel in his Old Indic grammar (1896: 66-68). The crucial element of his theory which is relevant in the present context is that he assumed lengthening in monosyllabic word forms, such as the 2 nd and 3 rd sg. active forms of the sigmatic aorist injunctive. Since the sigmatic aorist is the prototypical static paradigm in the verbal inflection, it offers the possibility of testing the relative merits of the two theories, Wackernagel’s lengthening in monosyllabic word forms versus a static paradigm with lengthened grade in the singular and full grade in the plural. As I have pointed out elsewhere (1987), the evidence substantiates Wackernagel’s view and forces us to reject the alternative because we find full, not lengthened grade in the 1 st sg. form, e.g. Vedic jeṣam ‘conquer’, stoṣam ‘praise’. The only 1 st sg. active form with lengthened grade in the sigmatic aorist injunctive is rāviṣam of the root ru- ‘hurt’, which is clearly analogical. It is therefore reasonable to assume that originally the static present also had lengthened grade in the 2 nd and 3 rd sg. active forms of the injunctive and full grade elsewhere. Following Hoffmann, Narten interprets jeṣam and 1 st pl. RV. jeṣma as precative forms (1964: 120). The reason for this interpretation is evidently the absence of lengthened grade (cf. Hoffmann 1967a: 254). The functional evidence for the interpretation as precative (Hoffmann 1967b: 32f.) or subjunctive (Insler 1975: 15 26 ) is very weak, while the formal objections against it are prohibitive. It is therefore preferable to retain the traditional view that these forms are what they look like: full grade injunctive forms, which were interchangeable with the corresponding subjunctive in certain contexts and which could be interpreted as precative when the latter category became common. Narten assumes that the injunctive forms yoṣam and stoṣam took their vocalism from the subjunctive (1964: 213, 277). The model for this analogic development is lacking, however, because the subjunctive ending was -āni, not -am. Hoffmann attributes the alleged substitution of the injunctive ending -am for the earlier subjunctive ending -ā to the influence of the 2 nd sg. imperative: “Das Bestreben, den Konjunktivausgang -ā von dem durch Auslautsdehnung gleichlautend gewordenen Imperativausgang zu sondern, hat das Ausweichen zu -am, wodurch die 1. Person deutlich gekennzeichnet wurde, gefordert” (1967a: 248). I find such influence highly improbable. The use of the 1 st sg. injunctive for the subjunctive must be explained from the meaning of the forms. Note that standard British English offers an exact parallel in the use of ‘I shall’ where other persons ‘will’. During my stay in Dublin, Dr. Patrick Sims-Williams told me that when an Irish friend asked him in front of an open door: “Will I go first?”, the only reasonable answer to him would be: “I don’t know”. Compare in this connection RV.VII 86.2 kad

The sigmatic aorist in Indo-European: Evidence for the space-time hypothesis By Bridget Drtnka (review)

232 LANGUAGE, VOLUME 74, NUMBER 1 (1998) linguistics' (339-67) by Kaplan addresses errors researchers make in relying on intuitions from descriptive theories, computational work, and psycholinguistics , namely procedural, substance, and interaction seductions. [Kim Honeyford, University of Waterloo.] The sigmatic aorist in Indo-European: Evidence for the space-time hypothesis. By Bridget Drtnka. (Journal of IndoEuropean Studies monographs, 13). Washington: Institute for the Study of Man, 1995. Pp. 154. The space-time hypothesis (i.e. the possibility of making an in-depth description of Indo-European with chronological and dialectal differences) has gained wide acceptance among Indo-Europeanists in the last years, and with her book Bridget Drinka adds valuable evidence for testing its validity. As she explains in the introductory chapter (1-7), handbooks and grammars usually reconstruct an s-aorist for the proto-language on the basis of Greek and Indo-Iranian ¿-aorists, Latin ¿-perfects, and some ¿-preterites of other Indo-European languages. D sets out to prove that the ¿-aorist is an innovation rather than an archaism, and I believe that she achieves her goal. In the introduction she also provides a general sketch of the space-time hypothesis. Just for the sake of accuracy, I would like to point out that although it is customary now to attribute the paternity of that theory to Wolfgang Meid, that is not the way the story really goes (see Francisco R. Adrados, "The new image of Indo-European', Indogermanische Forschungen 97.1-28, 1992). The core ofthe book consists ofa series ofchapters devoted to the analysis ofthe ¿-preterites ofparticular Indo-European languages: Indo-Iranian (8-33); Old Church Slavonic (34-48); Latin (49-92); Greek (93-1 19); and Hittite, Tocharian, Armenian, and Old Irish (120-34). She demonstrates that the lengthened grade of the root, usually posited as one of the characteristics of those ¿-constructions, is not an inherited feature from the protolanguage but, rather, an independent innovation of Old Indian, Old Church Slavonic, and Latin as a result of phenomena of compensatory lengthening in conditioning environments which are different from one language to the other. The chapter on Latin in especially interesting: starting from a reanalysis of ¿-forms, D sketches a global history of the Latin perfect which no doubt deserves attention. She also reformulates anew the conditions in which the so-called Lachmann' s law operates: The lengthening shown by some Latin perfects would be due to the phonetic loss of -«- and -d- markers, analogically extended from the present to the perfect. As for Celtic, D concentrates exclusively on Old Irish, but a short discussion of Continental Celtic ¿formations such as Gaulish legasit, readdas, or prinas (see Pierre-Yves Lambert, La langue gauloise, Paris: Errance, 1994) and Celtiberian ampitiseti would not be out of place. To those one could add now Celtiberian ausanto, attested in the third inscription from Botorrita, recently edited by Francisco BeItran , Javier de Hoz, and Jürgen Untermann (El tercer bronce de Botorrita (Contrebia Belaisca), Zaragoza: Diputación General de Aragón, 1996). Anyway, she argues convincingly that Irish f-preterites cannot continue the Indo-European ¿-aorist. The final chapter (135-44) presents the general conclusions ofD's study concerning the nonantiquity of the ¿-aorist, its vocalism, and its limited areal diffusion—just Greek and Indo-Iranian—with aspectual value. [Eugenio R. Lujan, Universidad Complutense de Madrid.] The possibility oflanguage: A discussion of the nature of language, with implications for human and machine translation . By Alan K. Melby with C. Terry Warner. (Benjamins translation library , 14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins , 1995. Pp. xxvi, 274. In this book, Melby argues in favor of three hypotheses : • Current techniques in machine translation cannot be extended so as to achieve fully automatic highquality translation of unrestricted text. • Domain-specific language differs in essential aspects from general language. • Generative grammar does not and cannot cover general language. The first claim is introduced by a very eclectic, very briefoverview ofthe history ofmachine translation . It is observed that either working systems are based on controlled language or they require postediting . The justification for the claim is closely linked to the second hypothesis. M argues that there are two quite different entities, lexicographical units and terminological units. Terminological units have a...

The possibility of language: A discussion of the nature of language, with implications for human and machine translation By Alan K. Melby with C. Terry Warner (review)

232 LANGUAGE, VOLUME 74, NUMBER 1 (1998) linguistics' (339-67) by Kaplan addresses errors researchers make in relying on intuitions from descriptive theories, computational work, and psycholinguistics , namely procedural, substance, and interaction seductions. [Kim Honeyford, University of Waterloo.] The sigmatic aorist in Indo-European: Evidence for the space-time hypothesis. By Bridget Drtnka. (Journal of IndoEuropean Studies monographs, 13). Washington: Institute for the Study of Man, 1995. Pp. 154. The space-time hypothesis (i.e. the possibility of making an in-depth description of Indo-European with chronological and dialectal differences) has gained wide acceptance among Indo-Europeanists in the last years, and with her book Bridget Drinka adds valuable evidence for testing its validity. As she explains in the introductory chapter (1-7), handbooks and grammars usually reconstruct an ¿-aorist for the proto-language on the basis of Greek and Indo-Iranian ¿-aorists, Latin ¿-perfects, and some ¿-preterites of other Indo-European languages. D sets out to prove that the ¿-aorist is an innovation rather than an archaism, and I believe that she achieves her goal. In the introduction she also provides a general sketch of the space-time hypothesis. Just for the sake of accuracy, I would like to point out that although it is customary now to attribute the paternity of that theory to Wolfgang Meid, that is not the way the story really goes (see Francisco R. Adrados, "The new image of Indo-European', Indogermanische Forschungen 97.1-28, 1992). The core ofthe book consists ofa series ofchapters devoted to the analysis ofthe ¿-preterites ofparticular Indo-European languages: Indo-Iranian (8-33); Old Church Slavonic (34-48); Latin (49-92); Greek (93-1 19); and Hittite, Tocharian, Armenian, and Old Irish (120-34). She demonstrates that the lengthened grade of the root, usually posited as one of the characteristics of those ¿-constructions, is not an inherited feature from the protolanguage but, rather, an independent innovation of Old Indian, Old Church Slavonic, and Latin as a result of phenomena of compensatory lengthening in conditioning environments which are different from one language to the other. The chapter on Latin in especially interesting: starting from a reanalysis of ¿-forms, D sketches a global history of the Latin perfect which no doubt deserves attention. She also reformulates anew the conditions in which the so-called Lachmann' s law operates: The lengthening shown by some Latin perfects would be due to the phonetic loss of -«- and -d- markers, analogically extended from the present to the perfect. As for Celtic, D concentrates exclusively on Old Irish, but a short discussion of Continental Celtic ¿formations such as Gaulish legasit, readdas, or prinas (see Pierre-Yves Lambert, La langue gauloise, Paris: Errance, 1994) and Celtiberian ampitiseti would not be out of place. To those one could add now Celtiberian ausanto, attested in the third inscription from Botorrita, recently edited by Francisco BeItran , Javier de Hoz, and Jürgen Untermann (El tercer bronce de Botorrita (Contrebia Belaisca), Zaragoza: Diputación General de Aragón, 1996). Anyway, she argues convincingly that Irish f-preterites cannot continue the Indo-European ¿-aorist. The final chapter (135-44) presents the general conclusions ofD's study concerning the nonantiquity of the ¿-aorist, its vocalism, and its limited areal diffusion—just Greek and Indo-Iranian—with aspectual value. [Eugenio R. Lujan, Universidad Complutense de Madrid.] The possibility oflanguage: A discussion of the nature of language, with implications for human and machine translation . By Alan K. Melby with C. Terry Warner. (Benjamins translation library , 14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins , 1995. Pp. xxvi, 274. In this book, Melby argues in favor of three hypotheses : • Current techniques in machine translation cannot be extended so as to achieve fully automatic highquality translation of unrestricted text. • Domain-specific language differs in essential aspects from general language. • Generative grammar does not and cannot cover general language. The first claim is introduced by a very eclectic, very briefoverview ofthe history ofmachine translation . It is observed that either working systems are based on controlled language or they require postediting . The justification for the claim is closely linked to the second hypothesis. M argues that there are two quite different entities, lexicographical units and terminological units. Terminological units have a finite...

The Sigmatic Aorist in Indo-European: Evidence for the Space-Time Hypothesis

The Sigmatic Aorist in Indo-European: Evidence for the Space-Time Hypothesis

Review of Drinka (1995): The Sigmatic Aorist in Indo-European

Review of Drinka (1995): The Sigmatic Aorist in Indo-European

Anatolian Evidence and the Origins of the Indo-European Mediopassive

The discovery of the Anatolian family of languages early in the present century' confronted Indo-Europeanists with a verbal system of considerably less complexity than that which had been assumed, largely on the basis of Greek and Indo-Iranian evidence, to have existed in the latest common period of the parent language. This raised questions which are still keenly debated today. Did the simplicity of the Anatolian system represent something more primitive than the classic image of Indo-European, out of which the latter could be explained as a subsequent development, or was it the simplified outcome of an originally more complex system, close to that which had been reconstructed before the Anatolian family was known? Where Anatolian had isolated features (such as the ending -i(š) of the 3 s. preterite of the –ḫi conjugation) corresponding to features which characterized the whole of a paradigm in Indo-European (such as –s– in the sigmatic aorist), had it preserved a relic of a once fully-formeds– aorist which had been largely lost as a result of merger with other categories, or was this a 3 s. ending which had subsequently become incorporated into the stem to form a new kind of paradigm?.

El carácter temporal de la oposición infectum/perfectum y el testimonio del verbo hitita

As is well known, the west Indo-European languages and Tocharian have a binary type of verbal flexion consisting of a present stem opposed to a past. According to the author this flexional type existed in the earliest phase of Indo-European, opposing to the present a single tense-stem similar to the Latin perfect, a stem characterized by endings of the -e/-to series. Thus the Latin perfects of the type dīxī, dēdī are not the result of contamination of a sigmatic aorist stem with a perfect stem. They are rather the continuation of an ancient Indo-European phenomenon. The study of Hittite conjugation supports the author’s thesis.

On the problem of lengthened ablaut degree and the slavic sigmatic aorist

On the problem of lengthened ablaut degree and the slavic sigmatic aorist

The Vedic Imperatives in -si

0. Within the Vedic verbal system there is a series of second singular forms made by suffixing -si to the full-grade root, which differ from the present type dsi 'thou art' in that they function primarily as imperatives; e.g. ydksi 'sacrifice'.' This archaic formation is found frequently in the Rigveda, where approximately 150 forms occur from 23 roots (?2); in other Vedic texts -si imperatives occur only for roots which have such forms in the Rigveda and predominantly in Rigvedic mantras; e.g. pdrsi rddho maghondm 'bring safely across the gift-giving of the patrons' (RV 8.103.7, 9.1.3); a devan vaksi ydksi ca 'bring the gods and sacrifice' (5.21.6, 6.16.2, 8.102.16); see Bloomfield, Concordance sv. pdrsi, a devan. Although this formation has engaged the attention of Sanskritists and IndoEuropeanists for a long time, the exact position of the -si imperatives within the Vedic verbal system has not been established. According to some they are indicatives used imperatively, so that they are considered part of the second-class present system; this is the view of Whitney, Gr. ?624; Macdonell, Ved. gr. ?451; Delbriick, Ai. Verb. ?28. A variation of the same view was proposed by Thurneysen, KZ 27.176 (1883): -si imperatives derive from root injunctives, to which could be suffixed -i or -u to form imperatives (e.g. srosi, srotu < .sru 'hear'). In the most recent full-scale treatment of Vedic grammar, Renou, Gr. de la langue vd peut-6tre ont-elles 61imin6 ce pr6sent s'il a exist6. II doit s'agir d'une formation autonome, of une ancienne d6sinence -s a pu gtre prolong6e par un i d6ictique.' Others have considered the -si imperative part of the sigmatic aorist system; thus Benfey, Vollst. Gr. ?860.2.2; Neisser, BB 7.231-3 (1883), 20.70-80 (1894); Bartholomae, IF 2.271-84 (1894).