sideration, a comparison of iva and the Sanscrit ê-na=ai-na=ya-na, furnished a strong presumption in favour of the opinion that in the case of v and ɛls=έvg the initial element is a mutilated remnant of the second pronoun Fa; and when we discover that ά-va-§, which, as we shall see afterwards, is derivable from ά-vά, was Fá-vag in Homer's time, and that in all probability it contains the same elements as the Hebrew 'ha-no-ki, which with the exception of the reduplicative first syllable corresponds to its synonym -ya-vn, we have as much evidence as we can expect in this ultimate refinement of etymological analysis, to convince us that the full form of a-vá was a compound of Fa and va. Considered under this point of view, there ought to be no difference of meaning between έ-v, 6ú-v, and ά-vά, which are equally compounded of the second and third elements; and, in point of fact, there are many correspondences in the use of these prepositions. As far as iv and avά are concerned they do not differ in signification otherwise than in and on, their English equivalents. For the same reason there ought to be an identity of meaning between avά and the first syllable of xatá, namely, xa xev, and there really is this equivalence in the particles άv and xɛv. It must therefore be the termination -Tα which constitutes the difference between άvά and xatά, and a little consideration will show that the affix operates in the same way and with the same results as the o which distinguishes vπέo from vñó (§ 179). For if àvá means "up," but xará, "down;" if avά means "backward," but xatá, like avta, "in front," the subject must be regarded as a point in the middle of a line, whether vertical or horizontal, of which one extremity is indicated by avά and the other by κατά. The termination of κατά and ἄν-τα must, like that of εἶτα, ἔπ-ει-τα, ἐνθαῦτα, &c., be a corruption of -τεν=θεν; compare ἔπειTev, Évtεv-Dev; and this termination is generally ablative, i. e. it denotes separation or motion from a place; so that the relation between nα-tá xev-dev and άvá-Favά=xevis much the same as that between super, sub-ter, sub, vñέo̟, vñó. And we have a further analogy in ά-TEQ, άv-TEQ, Lat. inter, Sanser. antar, Germ. unter, which in some of their applications give the sense opposed to άvá, "up," namely, "down," "between two points on the surface," "out of the way," and generally "separate," "apart" (below, § 204). That the antithesis of "backwards" and "forwards," "above" and "below," may coincide with that of "far" and "near," is shown by our common language; for we say "here in front of us," but "behind there," and "up there," but "down here."

184 The preposition άvá occurs, either separately or as a prefix, in almost every language of the Indo-Germanic family, and there are

few words which have more varied functions to perform. It is found even in the Semitic languages; for the negative and the prohibitive by are clearly connected with the prepositions by, −3 = ¿v, in (see Maskil le Sopher, p. 15)*. In Greek this particle appears not only as the dissyllable avά, but also under the monosyllabic forms va or vn, and av-, and even without the characteristic nasal as the prefix a- or . Similarly the Sanscrit ana is reduced occasionally to the initial a, and na occurs separately in Pâli, though it is used only as a termination in Sanscrit and Zend (Bopp, Vergl. Gramm. p. 531). This latter element stands independently in Latin, in the words nam, (Bopp, Vergl. Gramm. p. 534), num, nun-c, ně, nē, nì, nī, non; in Greek, in the words vv, vvv (compare oú-v, sa-m), vaí, vý, vy-, &c. In Sanscrit the full form a-na is used as a negative prefix: thus anapakâra, "harmlessness," "freedom from hatred and malice," is compounded of ana and apakâra, "evil doing." It is both in this sense, and as an augment indicating past time, that it is shortened into a. The same is the case with the Greek avά. We have both av- and va or vn as negative prefixes; we have avά so used as a prefix, and separately, in the form άvɛý, with a very similar signification; we have a for av as a negative prefix †, and we have - for avá as the verbal augment. That va is not a mere abbreviation of a-vá, like the modern Greek dev for ovdiv, appears from the fact, that άv- is found with the same privative meaning as va and avά; and in the Greek ά-nó (a-v), -TEQ (a comparative form), &c., as well as in the Sanscrit a-pa and a-va, we have a for na. In a different application of the same pronominal combination we have seen above that the Hebrew 'ha-ni, when used as a verbal prefix, is shortened into 'he, and that 'henesh becomes 'hish. With regard to -va we must remark that the primitive meaning of this stem is sufficient to account for its negative use, without assuming that when so used it is merely an abridgment of a-vá. We have before pointed out the idea of separation, removal, distance, conveyed by the words viv, vóó-qi, vóó-tos, &c.; this power

*It is to be remarked that by bears the same relation to άvá, "up," that - does to super, vñέq, über, ufar, "over," and thus completes the chain of analogies between the Greek and Hebrew particles involving and v.

On the supposition that the first syllable of ά-vá is the element of Fa, it is obvious that the negative prefix cannot be this syllable only: it must be a remnant either of avά the fuller form, or of va, the v having evanesced according to the general principle. We prefer the former alternative, and the same may have been the view of Lepsius when he proposed the following thesis: "particulam privativam apud Græcos a principio unam av fuisse; ceteras, quæ reperiantur, formas secundum euphoniæ leges inde natas esse" (de Tabulis Eugubinis, ad calc.).

of the element -na is so forcible, that when appended to the element ka, which is the strongest expression of proximity, it converts it into a pronoun (xɛi-vos), denoting distance in a very marked manner. It is to this same idea of distance that we owe the meaning of negation contained in va; for after all, what is a negation but an expression of farness or removal? and what way of negativing have we in our own language more decided than the common "far from it"?

а

It is on this account that we also find άnó and apa-na-pa with a negative meaning both in Greek and Sanscrit. Thus the word apakâra, mentioned above, which is composed of apa, "from," and kri, "to make," signifies "evil-doing," "injury," in perfect analogy with the Greek : οὐδὲν ἄπο τοῦ ἀνθρωπείου τρόπου πεποιήκαμεν (Thucyd. 1. 76). It is this use of άnó which has given occasion to the employment of ἀποκαλέω in a bad sense: thus Soph. Αj. 727: τὸν τοῦ μανέντος κἀπιβουλευτοῦ στρατοῦ ξύναιμον ἀποκαλοῦντες, “calling him by way of abuse." Aristoph. Aves, 1263: άñoиɛxλýnaμev dioɣeveis Dɛovs (unless we ought to read άnoxɛλýxαμɛv). Xenoph. Mem. 1. 2, § 6: τοὺς δὲ λαμβάνοντας τῆς ὁμιλίας μισθὸν ἀνδραποδιστὰς ἑαυτῶν ἀπεκάλει. 1. 2, § 57: ἀργοὺς ἀπεκάλει. 1. 6, § 13: σοφιστὰς ὥσπερ πόρνους ἀποκαλοῦσιν. Plato, Gorg. p. 512 c: ὡς ἐν ὀνείδει ἀποκαλέσαις ἂν μηχανοποιόν. Andoc. c. Alcib. 31, 10: ἄλλους ὀλιγαρχικούς —ἀποκαλεῖ. Εurip. Iph. Α. 1354: οἵ με τῶν γάμων ἀπεκάλουν ἥσσονα. Plut. Moral. p. 204r: ἀναισθήτους καὶ βαρβάρους ἀπεκάλει. Theatet. p.168 D : χαριεντισμόν τινα ἀποκαλῶν, which Schleiermacher properly translates "nannte er nicht dies einen schlechten Scherz;" Demosth. Fals. Leg. 47: λογογράφους τοίνυν καὶ σοφιστὰς ἀποκαλῶν. Aristides, Tom.n. p. 383: ἀποκαλεῖν ἀλάζονα (see also Stallbaum on Plato, Gorg. u. s.). The meaning "up," with which άvá is so often found, is only another modification of the same idea, for highness and farness are related notions. This is shown by the word avɛzág, which, we conceive, is a compound of άvá and Exás, although Döderlein supposes that it is formed from ἀνά, as περίξ is from περί, and that it is related to έxás in sound only (De äλpa intensivo, p. 12). Böckh has endeavoured to show (Nota Crit. in Pind. Olymp. п. 23) that άvenás always means "upwards." Plutarch says that the Attics used avεnás for avo, and άvézađev for ävæðɛv (in vîta Thesei, cxxxш). The grammarians allege that άvέxadev can only be used inì tónov, but that άvodev may be used ini zoóvov, and this is partly true (see Phrynichus, p. 270 Lob.; Thomas M. p. 77; Bachmann, Anecd. Vol. 1. p. 393). One would think that there must be some distinction between avodεv and άvéxadev, and that the latter was the stronger of the two, from their use in Eschylus, Choëph. 421, though Lobeck (ad Soph. Aj. 145, p. 148) looks upon this as one of many instances of a mere redundancy of

expression: "neque negari potest," he remarks, “de vocabulis idem valere, quod de foliis dici solet, nullum unum alteri perfecte simile esse, sed hæc discrimina plerumque delitescunt." The Scholiast on Aristophanes (Vesp. 18) says: ἀνεκὰς δὲ ἀντὶ τοῦ ἄνω, πάνυ ἑκὼς nai ais vos, which we believe to be a correct statement; the word implies both height and distance, as in the line of Pherecrates emended by Valckenaer (Diatrib. in Eurip. p. 285): τουτὶ τί ἐστιν; ὡς ἀνεκὰς τὸ κρίβανον: and this is also implied in the passage of Pindar on which Buchh is commenting: ὅταν θεοῦ μοῖρα πέμπῃ ἀνεκὰς ὄλβον ὑψηλόν, i. e. πέμπῃ ἀνεκὰς ὥστε ὑψηλὸν εἶναι.

As avά is used negatively, so is natά used affirmatively. But in this case, at least in composition, the opposite of nará is often aлó: thus, xatά-onu, "to say yes," άñó-onu, "to say no." As opposed to xata-vεvw, "to express assent by nodding," we have both άñovevo and ava-vevo with the contrary signification. The simple awas also a direct opposition to zatά, as Thucydides plainly announces (1.123): οὐ γὰρ δή πεφευγότες ταῦτα ἐπὶ τὴν πλείστους δὴ βλάψασαν καταφρόνησιν κεχωρήκατε, ἣ ἐκ τοῦ πολλοὺς σφάλλειν το ἐνάντιον ὄνομα ἀ-φροσύνη μετωνόμασται.

185 That a-vá is used not only in a negative or privative sense, but also with an intensive meaning, has been asserted by the old grammarians, but the instances adduced have been doubtfully received by modern philologers; and in some cases, when this prefix appears in its shortest form &-, it cannot be determined whether it is a relic of άvá, or a representative of a=6a (above, § 181). The words, which are supposed to commence with the intensive avά, have been examined by Döderlein in a special treatise (Commentatio de ähqa intensivo sermonis Græci. Erlang. 1830). The following, commencing with a-, seem to be intensive and yet not collective; namely, a-tέvns, "excessively stretched, obstinate, stubborn;" ά-zavýs, "widely opened, extremely gaping;” ἀ-σπερχές, “very eagerly;” ἀ-σκελές and ἀ-σκελέως, "exceedingly hard;" ά-xdua, "very great sorrow" (Buttmann, Ausf. Sprl. II. p. 358); and that these may presume the prefix άvá is clear from the words which have the prefix vn- with an intensive signification: such are νηγάτεος (ἀγαθός), νήδυμος (ἡδύς), νηλιτής (ἀλιτής), νηπεδανός (ἠπεδανός), νητρικῶς (ἀτρεκῶς), νήχυτος (πολύχυτος), νωλεμές (εἰλεῖν, comp. οὐλαμός, Döderlein, de ἄλφα intensivo, pp. 21 foll.). We do not refer výoitos to this class. It seems to us rather to be connected with the root of νηρεύς, &c., and thus the νήριτος ὕλη of Hesiod (Op. et D. 511) will imply a floating fluctuating mass of foliage (above, p. 160, note). Supposing, however, that the intensive ά- and vnbelong to the same pronominal element as the negative prefix of the same

349

form, it becomes necessary to inquire how the same form could have borne meanings so opposite.

α

Döderlein attempts to reconcile the negative and intensive uses of a as follows (de ahqa intensivo, p. 24): "I consider that by a sort of abuse the proper force of a privative has been turned into an expression of excess (nimietas); just as in those words in which a is put for dus; for the depravation of a thing is nearly the same as its defect, and excess is nearly the same as depravation. Thus, among the Greeks, anáλauos is, in Homer, he who is without skill, in Pindar, he who makes a bad use of his skill; and in German, Unlust is used in a privative sense, Unstern in a depravative sense, and Unstier in an exaggerative and intensive sense. If greatness lies between immensity and littleness, immense and little things are alike excluded from the category of greatness." Pott (Etymol. Forsch. zweite Auflage, 1. Theil. p. 387) explains the negative prefix with an intensive signification in such words as Unzahl, "an enormous number;" ungross, "very great;" Unkuh, “a great cow," &c., by the conception of a magnitude without comparison or proportion. In our opinion the negative and intensive significations of &- are alike due to the notion of "farness," which we have pointed out as the primary one of ά-vά, va-, and a-; for distance suggests magnitude or extent quite as much as separation and incompatibility; and we shall see, in the following chapter, that in the form vai or vý this negative prefix appears as a most emphatic affirmation. With regard to Döderlein's supposed connexion between "excess" and "depravity," it cannot be doubted that μála and uóls are connected with mălus, and that μóyıs and μózos spring from the same origin as uέyas. So, too, we understand Virgil's iniquo pondere rastri as referring only to excessive weight; and in-gens = лεQ-quís, means "over-grown," i. e. of excessive magnitude.

186 But by far the most important of the correlative uses of άvá and zarά is their appearance in an abridged form as άv and xév, with much the same functions to perform. That the av, which is found in conjunction with verbs, expressing the apodosis of a condition, is in reality the preposition avά, appears clearly enough from the use of that preposition in the old poets under the same shortened form (Böckh, Not. Critt. in Pind. p. 387). It is also sufficiently obvious. from the use of the prepositions, άv-tí, which bears the same relation το ανά that προ-τί does to πρό, and ἀμ-φί, which stands for ἀναφί, as ❝ppa does for ava-qw=άva-dFw. It is altogether a matter of indifference whether we regard -v as the locative of the mutilated pronoun ά, or consider the v as part of the suffix -va, for the v of the locative is simply this suffix in a mutilated state.