Obrázky na stránke

with which, in the case of imitative roots, one consonant is exchanged for another of similar nature. The tenues p, t, k, are particularly liable to interchange, and accordingly we find a numerous series of words parallel with those we have already been considering, but grouped round a root rap instead of rak.

The Scotch has, to roup, roip or rolp, to cry hoarsely, to croak:

“ Thir slaves of Satan we say roupit as they had been ravens. Knox in Jamieson.

“ The raven came rolpand when he hard the race,
Sa did the gled with mony piteous pew."-

Lyndsay in Jamieson. G. rülpsen, to belch; Sc. roup, hoarseness, roupit, hoarse ; Du. raven, to croak like a frog; and thence the name of the raven itself, as before we found the rook and the crow designated from their hoarse cry; Pl.D. nacht-rave, the goat-sucker, a bird of a cry somewhat similar to the corncrake; Lat. ravus, hoarse, then dull in colour, and not vice versá; Icel, ropa, to belch, to hawk; Sw. rapa, Dan. ræbe, ribbe, reppe, to belch; reppe, roppe, as Gael. rác, make a noise like geese or ducks; Fr. roupiller, to make a slight noise in the throat, to snift; roupie, mucus, whence E. ropy, slimy; Bav. ropfezen, gropfezen ; Swiss ropsen; Prov.E. to rasp or resp, rive, rift, to belch. The G. rüpfen, vorrüpfen einem etwas, to reproach one with anything, seems identical with the E. expression of ripping up grievances :

“Such helpless harms it's better hidden keep,

Then rip up grief where it may not avail." -F.Q. The word is not to be understood as if it signified ripping up a bag in which the grievances were shut up, but in the sense of the Dan. ribbe or reppe above mentioned, by the same metaphor by which wreaking one's wrongs was formerly explained, viz. vomiting them up on the author of them. So to rip up old grievances is to cast up their remembrance like the fumes of undigested food. To brook an affront exhibits the opposite side of the same metaphor; to brook is to digest, to let the affront pass down without return.

The same application to the sense of rejection and the connected ideas, is found as in the former modification of the root. A rip is a worn-out worthless animal; Finn. rapa, dregs, mud; ropakko, Esthon. roppus, mud, filth; rop, dirty, coarse; Gael. raip, rapas, filth; rapach, nasty, filthy; Gr.

pontos, rubbish.



[Read April the 23rd.] Δαίω has three different meanings :-1. Δαίομαι, δάσομαι, édao áunv, to divide, to distribute. The original signification of this verb appears clearer in datfw, to cut, to tear, to destroy.-Compare δαιτρός and δατέομαι.

2. Δαίνυμι, δαίσω, έδαισα, to distribute food, to entertain. Aalvupai, to partake of food, to feast; daís, a meal.

3. daiw, to cause to burn, to kindle; daloual, déona, to burn, intr. Hence dats, sáos, darós, a torch.

There can be very little doubt that the first two signfiications and verbs were originally identical, but the endeavours which have been made by some eminent scholars to deduce the third meaning likewise from the first, must be considered as failures. We cannot be persuaded that the idea of burning, arising from the perception of a natural phænomenon, can be derived from the far more abstract notion of destroying, dividing. Aware of this difficulty, Pott (Et. F. I. 186, 282) compared the first two verbs with the Sanskrit to cut; the third with the root dah, to burn. This comparison seems to have met with general approval, and has found its way into Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon: “ Aalo, to divide. The Sanskrit root is , abscindere. Aalw= kalw. The Sanskrit root is dah, urere.” One objection to this etymology is, that dah ought to be represented in Greek by day, and one expects, at least in the perfect, dédnxa rather than Séona. It is true that x has sometimes, though very rarely, been dropped in the middle of Greek words, but no kind of change will satisfactorily account for the v in dedavuévos, a participle

which, according to the Etymol. Magnum, was used by Simonides. Δαύω, το καίω, παρά Σιμωνίδη-μηρίων δεδουμένων-παρά το δαίω το καίω, τρόπη του ιώτα είς υ. The analogy of καίω, καύσω, καυστός, and κλαίω, κλαύσομαι, κέκλαυμαι, κλαυστός, proves only that δαίω, καίω, κλαίω, are derived from δαF, καF, κλαF, and in the last instance from δυ, κυ, κλυ, in the same manner as πλέω, πλεύσομαι from πλυ (pluere), ρέω, ρεύσομαι, ερρύης (ρο Γαϊσι in a Corcyrean inscription), from ρυ, χέω, κέχυκα, εχύθην (χύσις) from χυ. The root δαF or δυ appears besides in another form, Δάϊος, δήϊος, destructive, hostile, is frequently found as an epithet of fire:-ΙΙ. Β. 415. πρήσαι δε πυρός δηΐοιο θύρετρα.

Ζ. 331. μη τάχα άστυ πυρός δηΐοιο θέρηται.

Θ. 181. μνημοσύνη τις έπειτα πυρός δηΐοιο γενέσθω.
– Ι. 347, 674. νήεσσιν αλεξέμεναι δήϊον πύρ.
– Λ. 667. εισόκε δή νήες-πυρός δηΐοιο θέρωνται.
– Π. 167. λεύσσω δή παρά νηυσι πυρός δηΐοιο ιωήν.

Π. 301, Σ. 13. νηών απωσάμενοι δήϊον πυρ.
Esch. Septem, 205. πόλιν και στράτευμαπτόμενον

πυρί δαίω, &c. Now Priscian tells us in two passages, that dáïos had a digamma. I. 21: “Inveniuntur etiam pro vocali correpta hoc digamma illi (Eoles) usi, ut 'Αλκμάν : Και χείμα πυρ τε Fiov.” I. 22: “Hiatus quoque causa solebant illi interponere F, quod ostendunt poetae Eolide usi 'Αλκμάν: Και χεύμα πυρ τε δάδιον,&c. This form, I believe, sufficiently warrants our connecting δάϊος with δαίω, δεδαυμένος, and our accepting as its original meaning that of “burning,” from which we arrive by an easy step at that of “ destructive.”

The Sanskrit verb du signifies :—1. (Following the fifth class pres. dunoti, perf. dudáva (=Séona), aor. adaushit), to give pain, to afflict with sorrow. 2. (After the fourth conjugation, pres. dúyate, perf. duduve, partic. dúna), to be in pain, to feel distressed. These meanings arise from the idea of « burning,” taken in an active and passive sense respectively. We find a clear analogy in the verb tapati, commonly 'to burn,' but also 'to pain,' 'to hurt,' and 'to feel pain, to be afflicted,' and in the passive, 'to do penance.' The derivatives of du keep the original meaning. They are dava, dáva, a wood on fire, and fire in general; davathu, distress, pain, and also inflammation of the eyes. But every possible doubt is removed by the fact, that the language of the Vedas has preserved the verb in question in its primitive and fundamental signification. A clear passage occurs in the 'Chândogya Upanishad,' v. 24, 3: Yatheshíkatúlam agnau protam pradûyeta, evam hásya sarve pápmánaḥ pradûyante, ya etad evam vidván agnihotram juhoti :—“As a brush of reed is burnt when thrown into fire, so are burnt all the sins of a man who, possessed of this knowledge, performs a sacrifice to Agni.” Atharvaveda, ix. 4, 18: Çatayágam yo yajate, nainam dunvanti agnayas :“No fires burn (hurt) him, who sacrifices with a hundred oxen.' Ibid. v. 22, 2 :--Ayam yo viçván haritán kļiņoshi, ucchocayann agnir ivâbhidunvan :-“All men makest thou, O Takman [this is a certain disease], yellow, burning their bodies like blazing fire.” These are, I hope, sufficient proofs to show that, as I have stated above, dalw stands for dafía, and leads us back to a root AT; and that, consequently, a comparison with the Sanskrit root dah must be rejected.

The comparison of daleolar with the Sanskrit root is less exceptionable. But here also we meet in the Vedas with a verb which, though nearly related to , stands in a more immediate connexion with daleo bal. The root day signifies “to break, to destroy,” and “to divide, to distribute, to give." The third pers. pres. dáyate agrees in every single letter with daletai. This verb occurs very frequently, and its application will appear clearly from a few passages. 1. To break, to destroy; R. V. vi. 6, 5.:-durvartur bhímo dáyate vanáni :“ fire terrible and unquenchable in its progress breaks (destroys) the woods.” R. V. iv. 7, 10: sthirá cid anná dáyate vi jambhais :-“Agnis breaks with his jaws his food (the wood) however hard.” 2. To divide, to distribute: R. V. vi. 30, 1: eko ajuryo dáyate vasúni :-"he alone, Indra, never old, divides wealth.” R. V. i. 84, 7: ya eka id vidáyate vasu martáya dáçushe : "he who alone distributes wealth to a man who worships him."


[Read May the 21st.] The word ploro and its derivatives do not, at first sight, appear to present much difficulty to the philologist. Throughout the whole range of classical Latinity, from Ennius to Statius, we find ploro invariably used to express the act of 'lamenting' or 'bewailing,' while its six compounds, apploro, imploro, opploro, perploro, comploro, and deploro, faithfully preserve the same radical meaning, with such variations as their respective prepositional prefixes usually induce upon simple verbs. But when we come to consider the remaining derivative, exploro, we are at once met by a difficulty. Not only does exploro itself retain no trace of the idea of lamentation or vocal expression of sorrow, which appears to be inherent in the uncompounded verb; but its ordinary usages give us at first sight no help in tracing the association of ideas which led the framers of the word from 'lamenting' to exploring. The difficulty I have remarked, with reference to exploro, is one which occurs in all languages, and nowhere more frequently than in Latin and Greek. Hardly a single class of words can be named in either of these two languages, in which some one or more of the members, though agreeing with their companions in mere external form, yet present such remarkable anomalies, either of usage or signification, as to make us doubt their entire right to the position in which they have been placed. In such a case there is clearly a nodus vindice dignus philologico; and as in this particular instance none of the ordinary dictionaries, from Forcellinus to Freund, throw any light on the matter, the following observations are submitted to the Society, with the view of supplying this deficiency, and also of calling the attention of those more capable to solve the problem than myself, to a point which has always appeared to me one of considerable difficulty.

Now with regard to ploro itself, the only sense which the word bears in classical writers is, as I have said, that of 'be

« PredošláPokračovať »