« AnteriorContinuar »
to which has been added the suffix as. Compound suffixes § 82. should strictly form the last division and be treated separately; however, since the question whether a given suffix is simple or compound cannot always be answered with certainty, and since, moreover, compound suffixes often very closely resemble simple ones in function and employment, we here treat compound suffixes under their first elements.
1. Formation of Derived Verbal-Stems.
On derived verb-stems generally.
Derived verb-stems, though presupposing noun-stems, are here treated before the latter, because, like primary verb-stems and roots, they frequently underlie noun-stems.
All verbs which possess no stem-formative elements, except those which serve for the formation of the tense-stems, have the form of stem-verbs; but those verbs which, in other forms than the present, show besides the root such elements as were not originally used for the formation of present- or other tense-stems, have the form of derived verbs.
At later periods of language-development, present-stem formative elements easily become united with the verbal-root so closely, that they even remain in forms other than those of the present tense, e.g. iu-n-g-o, √iug, where n is the present infix; yet perf. is iu-n-c-si for *iuc-si, even iu-n-c-tu-s for *iuc-tu-s, cf. iug-u-m: a verb does not however become in any way a derived one by this union.
Intensive verbs in Sanskrit and Zend must be considered as closely akin to verbs which are reduplicated in their present- or aorist-stems; as we do not, therefore, hold them to be derived, in the stricter sense of the term (they show no constant additional element), we cannot deal with them in this place, but shall do so later on where we discuss 'present-stem-formation.'
It cannot be denied that sometimes verbs which are obviously derived may assume the form of primary verbs, e.g.
§ 83. Sk. kršṇa-ti (behave like kršņa-s), from subst. Kršṇa-s (proper n.); Goth. salti-th (he salts), pf. saisalt, from subst. salt (salt), whilst at others stem-verbs appear in the form of derived verbs, as e.g. Lat. habe-t, Goth. habai-th (3 sg. pres.), Lat. habē-bo (fut.), Goth. habai-da (pf.), which we can hardly consider derived, is conjugated just like decidedly derived-verbs, e.g. Lat. mone-t, f.f. mānaya-ti (causes to think), fut. monē-bo, √man (think), Lat. men (cf. Lat. me-min-i, primary verb from same root), stem of causative verb mānaya-; Goth. veihai-th (hallows), pf. veihai-da from veih-s (holy). In fact the forms of undoubted stem-verbs and those of clearly derived-verbs are so intermingled in certain of the existing languages, that from a purely morphological point of view a sharp and complete distinction between primary and derived verbal-stems is impossible, and not unfrequently it is still doubtful to which class a given verb belongs. Certain tense-stems often have the forms of derived-verbs, whilst others show those of the stem-verbs, e.g. Lat. vidē-mus (pres.) beside vidi-mus (pf.), etc.; v. 'Conjugation.'
Since we are here considering the form only, not the function of the words, we can arrange derived verb-stems only according to stem-formative elements, not according to the relations which they express. Hence we speak of stem-formation by means of ya, etc., not of intensive, causative, etc., verb-stems. We place first those formations which can be proved most archaic, and let follow in order those which occur in particular languages only of our family, and which must therefore in all likelihood, be considered as later formations.
It is often hard to pronounce with certainty what is the next underlying form in the case of derived verb-stems. We could not venture to decide off-hand whether, e.g. Sk. bhāráyā-mi, Gk. popéw-(u), stem bhāraya-, Gk. popeye-, is formed by stepformation and by sf. -ya- from verb-stem Sk. bhára-, Gk. pépe-, in Sk. bhára-ti, Gk. þépe-(7)ɩ (3 sg. pres.), or by means of sf.
-ya- from a substantive stem Sk. bhāra-, Gk. pópo- (n. sg. Sk. § 83. bhára-s, Gk. pópo-s).
Note. The formation of the present-stem has been considered as the formation of a derived verb whenever it expresses an evident relation, as e.g. the passive or inchoative. This, however, is not admissible, were it only for the reason, that originally every kind of present-stem-formation represented a distinct relation. If this were not so, all verbs would exhibit one and the same present-stem-form. Besides there is no doubt that we count as 'derived verb-stems' only such formations as are not confined to the present-stem; and it would, moreover, be impossible to distinguish verbs as stem-verbs and derived-verbs.
Verbal-stems in original -ya- (-a-ya-) with root-vowel § 84. raised to first step, when formed from verbal-stems. Verbal-stems in non-radical -ya- are found in all Indo-European languages, and must therefore be ascribed to a period as early as that of the original language (their function is manifold, especially causative, transitive, but also durative and intransitive). They naturally lean to verbal-stems and nominalstems. The formative-element -aya- is probably to be broken up into -a-ya-, a being the final sound of the fundamental nominal- or verbal-stem, while ya is a very commonly used element in stem-formation (cf. pronominal ya, of rel. and dem. functions). The root-vowel is regularly raised a step.
Indo-European original language. Only one kind of such verbs, and of this only a few forms can be traced, esp. the pres. (and what is akin to it), e.g. 3 sg. pres. bhāraya-ti (=Sk. bhāráya-ti, Gk. *popeye(t)ɩ, i.e. Popeî; in Sk. with causative, in Gk. with durative function, from a stem bhāra-, popo-, origl. ✔bhar, Gk. pep ferre); further future bhāraya-sya-ti (Sk. bhārayi-šyá-ti, Gk. popń-σei=*Popeye-σye-Tɩ), and lastly the compound aorist a-bhāraya-sam (ẻ-pópn-σa). So too sada-ya-ti (he places)=Sk. sādá-ya-ti, Goth. sat-yi-th, √ sad (sit); vaida-ya-ti (foretells)=Sk. vēdáya-ti (id.), Goth. (fair-)veiteith (looks to) for *veit-yi-th, √vid (see, know), etc.
The correspondence between Gk. and Sk. makes it not unlikely that formations such as e.g. maran-ya-ti (dies, durative) from an abstract noun, n. sg. marana-m (whose final a, as often happens, has dropped out before sf. ya, mar, die), were not foreign to the origl. lang. In the formation of the remaining tense-forms languages do not agree. Probably the simple aorist was not formed at all, and the perfect expressed by periphrasis.
Sanskrit. E.g. bhārája-ti, 3 sg. pres. causative vb. √bhar, either belonging to a noun-stem bhāra- (load), bhara- (bearing; or the act of bearing), or to a verb-stem bhara- (bhára-ti he bears); sādáya-ti, in the same way fr. √sad (sit), cf. stem sāda(m. placing down, setting); vēdáya-ti (makes to know) similarly fr. √vid (see, know), cf. vēda- (m. knowledge, holy writ); bōdháya-ti (makes to know), budh (know), cf. bōdha-, pres.-stem and noun-stem, bōdha-s (knowledge, instruction). Roots in -ar often have no step-formation, e.g. dāráya- and daráya-, √ dar (burst, split); vārάya- and varáya-, √ var (cover, choose). Further, before two consonants the step-formn. does not take place, e.g. kalpáya-, √ kalp (be in order; kalpa-, adj. fitted, subst. m. order); indeed we actually find weakened root-syllables, e.g. grbháya-, √ grabh (grasp, akin to grbhá-s, gripe); mrdáya-, √mard (grind, both these examples belong to the more archaic language). Elsewhere also unraised a is sometimes found, e.g. damáya-, √ dam (be tame, tame; cf. dama-s, the act of taming, breaking in), etc. Roots in i, u, have the 2nd step, e.g. näyȧ-ya-ti, √ni (lead); çrāvá-ya-ti, √ çru (hear). The perf. of these verb-stems is periphrastically formed by means of an abstract-form in a and the perf. of an auxiliary verb, e.g. vēduya-kakāra, lit. 'notionem feci'; the aorist does not belong to these stems in -aya-, but was formed from the reduplicated root. This reduplication has the force of a causal function, which may be taken as a step-formation of the active, e.g. á-vīvid-am, pres. vēdayā-mi; other forms of these verbs lose ya, thus the past formed from the future (the so-called conditional),
e.g. á-vēd-i-šyam, stem vēdaya-, etc. This belongs, however, § 84. rather to Indian special-grammar, as being peculiar to Sk.
Amongst stems clearly formed from nouns are yōktrá-ya-ti (binds round, embraces), noun-stem yōktra- (ntr. band); tulá-ya-ti (weighs), stem tula-, n. sg. tulá (fem. balance, scales),
But before the -ya- the final -a- of the stem is not seldom lengthened to a (v. supr. § 15, 2, a), e.g. vāšpā-ya-tē (weeps), stem vāšpa- (tear), lõhitā-ya-ti (reddens), stem lõhita- (red), açvä-yá-ti (wishes for horses), stem áçva- (horse), etc.; cf. rāģā-ya-ti (behaves like a king), stem rāģan- (n. sg. ráģā king), thus accompanied by loss of final n from the underlying nounstem. Similar lengthening in the case of i and u before y occurs (cf. § 15, 2, a), e.g. patī-yá-ti (desires a husband), stem páti(husband), asu-ya-ti (snarls, is angry), stem ásu- (breath, spirit). The a also is weakened to i, and then i is lengthened to i, e.g. putri-yá-ti (filium cupit), stem putra- (son).
Moreover the stem-termination drops off altogether, e.g. putrakām-ya-ti (desires a son), stem putrá-kāma- (desiring sons, children; putrá-s son, káma-s wish, love). Here we must esp. mention the verbs in -anya which occur in the earliest Sanskrit (the Vēdas): they are formed from abstract nouns in -ana(n. sg. -ana-m, ntr.), e.g. karan-yá-ti (he goes), stem káraṇa(going) kar (go); bhuran-yá-ti (quivers, is in motion), stem bhuraṇa- (adj. active), √bhur (quiver, move rapidly). Cf. Gk. examples such as μapaive (makes to wither away), i.e. maranya-ti, √mar origl. (die).
To stems in 8, -ya- is added immediately, e.g. tapas-yá-ti (chastises himself), stem tápas- (mortification); namas-yá-ti (worships), stem námas- (worship). Through the analogy of such forms arose a denominative-form in -sya-, which comes into use also where there is no noun-stem in -as-. In other than present forms, generally, the y only remains (e.g. fut. namasy-išyá-ti), yet this y also often disappears (namas-išyá-ti),