Thaptw: aorist passive etafhn (epsilon, tau, alpha, phi, eta, nu)
What's the explanation for this? The aspiration seems to have changed place.
Just guessing, I would say that the tau has dissimilated because of the phi. But why the phi? Perhaps it was expecting (or making the analogy with?) another theta aorist passive (luw etc), hence the aspiration?
Sorry if that sounds confused. I hope you get the general idea.
Thucydides
Conjugation of thaptw
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 9:46 pm
- Location: Christ Church Oxford
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 7:15 am
- Location: The Netherlands
The explanation is that originally both t and p were aspirated. With the formation of the present stem, the p lost its aspiration, so that there was no reason for the t to dissimilate. In the aorist stem, the aspiration of p was retained; the t then lost its aspiration.
I don't have references to any grammars (Smyth, Kühner, Sihler, Rix &c.) at the moment, but if you need them, I could look it up.
Ptolemaios
I don't have references to any grammars (Smyth, Kühner, Sihler, Rix &c.) at the moment, but if you need them, I could look it up.
Ptolemaios
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 3399
- Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:55 pm
- Location: Madison, WI, USA
- Contact:
This process Ptolemaios is describing is known as Grassman's Law, and applies to Greek and Sanskrit. When two aspirates follow one another, the first is unaspirated. However, when the -t- was added to the present stem, the final phi lost aspiration, so the theta remained at the beginning.
The same process accounts for the paradigm of "hair": θρίξ, τριχός, ἡ.
The same process accounts for the paradigm of "hair": θρίξ, τριχός, ἡ.
William S. Annis — http://www.aoidoi.org/ — http://www.scholiastae.org/
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
τίς πατέρ' αἰνήσει εἰ μὴ κακοδαίμονες υἱοί;
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 603
- Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2003 11:42 pm
- Location: Cambridge
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Hi,
To beat a dead horse:
original root θαφ + τ > θαπτ. The initial aspirate is allowed to stand because the subsequent aspirate disappeared into the πτ.
But Grassman's law operates in the 2d aorist passive giving ἐτάφην < ἐθάφην.
There are cases where Grassman doesn't operate, e.g., 1st aorist passive, m-p perfect imperative and infinitive, respectively:
ἐθάφθην
τεθάφθω
τεθάφθαι
Cordially,
Paul
To beat a dead horse:
original root θαφ + τ > θαπτ. The initial aspirate is allowed to stand because the subsequent aspirate disappeared into the πτ.
But Grassman's law operates in the 2d aorist passive giving ἐτάφην < ἐθάφην.
There are cases where Grassman doesn't operate, e.g., 1st aorist passive, m-p perfect imperative and infinitive, respectively:
ἐθάφθην
τεθάφθω
τεθάφθαι
Cordially,
Paul
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2003 8:18 am
- Location: Belgium
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 9:46 pm
- Location: Christ Church Oxford
-
- Textkit Fan
- Posts: 268
- Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2003 9:46 pm
- Location: Christ Church Oxford
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 7:15 am
- Location: The Netherlands