Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.
Post Reply
User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Location: Nanchang, PRC
Contact:

Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Post by ἑκηβόλος » Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:05 am

If the PIE verbal ending *(Ø)-néwti produced transitive perfective verbs.

Are all Greek -νυμι verbs transitive?

Wiktionary entry for *(Ø)-néwti
τί δὲ ἀγαθὸν τῇ πομφόλυγι συνεστώσῃ ἢ κακὸν διαλυθείσῃ;

afleck
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Post by afleck » Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:40 pm

Short answer: there are verbs with middle endings that are not transitive, like πέπνυμαι "be conscious" and πτάρνυμαι "to sneeze"

Probably better to refer to this as the *-néw- athematic suffix, the -ti is just the 3rd singular ending. That wiktionary entry is a bit short-sighted, I think.

Sihler (section 455) says that this form is "copiously attested, indeed productive" in Hittite, and "forms both deverbatives (causatives) and denominatives (factitives), so hu-is-nu-zi 'causes to live' and e-es-har-nu-ut imperat. 'make bloody'"

This sense is "detectable elsewhere in some formations that appear to be old, notably G ὄρνυμι 'stir up, incite'... cf. intrans. L orior '(a)rise, move'."

"In G the suffix is common, and occurs in obvious neologisms like δείκνυμι 'point out'.... There is no semantic flavor traceable to the affix [emphasis added]" He adds that οἰχνέω might be a thematic version of an original *-neumi

User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Location: Nanchang, PRC
Contact:

Re: Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Post by ἑκηβόλος » Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:37 am

afleck wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:40 pm
"In G the suffix is common, and occurs in obvious neologisms like δείκνυμι 'point out'.... There is no semantic flavor traceable to the affix [emphasis added]"
If *deyḱ- is the imperfective form of the verbal root, why was an affix creating an imperfective transitive added?

The Wiktionary entry for *deyḱ-
τί δὲ ἀγαθὸν τῇ πομφόλυγι συνεστώσῃ ἢ κακὸν διαλυθείσῃ;

afleck
Textkit Neophyte
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Jun 07, 2019 5:10 pm

Re: Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Post by afleck » Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:14 am

ἑκηβόλος wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:37 am

If *deyḱ- is the imperfective form of the verbal root, why was an affix creating an imperfective transitive added?
I would not rely on Wiktionary for your Indo-European historical linguistics. Before Hittite was learned there wasn't really a consensus on -new-, most people thought it was just a reanalysis of the stem klneu- which is actually a nasal infix in the stem klew-. Furthermore, the word δείκνυμι, as Sihler has pointed out, is a neologism in G and so the original meaning in PIE doesn't really apply. Whereas in an old word like ὄρνυμι, it does, and as already pointed out this has a causative meaning rather than an imperfective one.

It is probably more accurate to think of *deyḱ-/*deik̂- as a root and the affix as marking the present tense. Greek verbs in -νυ- lose this affix in other tenses. Similarly to how you have λαμβάνω in the present, ἐλαβον in the aorist. Or ἐλαύνω/ἔλασα.

If you're interested in this kind of stuff, delve deeper into historical linguistics! you'll learn a lot and have fun too.

User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Location: Nanchang, PRC
Contact:

Re: Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Post by ἑκηβόλος » Tue Jun 11, 2019 12:04 pm

Wikipedia is a convenient presentation (format) of material. I see that the following is missing:
afleck wrote:
Mon Jun 10, 2019 3:40 pm
Sihler (section 455) says that this form is "copiously attested, indeed productive" in Hittite, and "forms both deverbatives (causatives) and denominatives (factitives), so hu-is-nu-zi 'causes to live' and e-es-har-nu-ut imperat. 'make bloody'"
Just looking at Hoffner and Melchert’s Reference Grammar today. In sections 10.15 and 10.16, they make mention of the section 455 that you quoted from, and give a number examples of both types.

Having no mention in the Wiktionary of forms derived from *-néwti in Hittite is a noticeable omission.
τί δὲ ἀγαθὸν τῇ πομφόλυγι συνεστώσῃ ἢ κακὸν διαλυθείσῃ;

User avatar
ἑκηβόλος
Textkit Zealot
Posts: 964
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2013 10:19 am
Location: Nanchang, PRC
Contact:

Re: Are -νυμι (PIE *(Ø)-néwti) verbs always transitive?

Post by ἑκηβόλος » Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:07 pm

afleck wrote:
Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:14 am
Similarly to how you have λαμβάνω in the present, ἐλαβον in the aorist.
Did the nasal infix and nasal suffix originally have different functions?

The infix looks similar to the Hittite infix -ni(n)- a causative marker. Did it have that function in Proto-Hellenic or in the parent PIE too or was that a shift/development in Hittite?
τί δὲ ἀγαθὸν τῇ πομφόλυγι συνεστώσῃ ἢ κακὸν διαλυθείσῃ;

Post Reply