Beekes is now out in paperback, and has been since 2016, actually, though I just found out. If the $575 hard back price tag scared you away before, the paperback is $120.
I can photograph some entries if anyone is interested. Looking over it so far, it seems to incorporate a lot of Frisk. My etymological knowledge is just about 0, however.
I just deleted two posts. No hard feelings from the users in question, I hope, but we can’t have file-sharing discussions on the public forum. [Consider using the private message button at the top of the page instead of asking people publicly where to download files.]
No problem, thanks for letting me know the rule. And thanks for letting us know about Beekes, which I wasn’t aware of.
Randy
why would you want to stop people from accessing resources they otherwise would not be able to afford? did you never avail yourself of the xerox machine in a library?
That’s a reasonable argument. But there is an argument on the other side as well. You may wish to see the court ruling against Library Genesis:
https://www.leagle.com/decision/infdco20151102c21
It cannot be denied that there is a compelling public interest in fostering scientific achievement, and that ensuring broad access to scientific research is an important component of that effort. As the Second Circuit has noted, “[c]opyright law inherently balances two competing public interests. the rights of users and the public interest in broad accessibility of creative works, and the rights of copyright owners and the public interest in rewarding and incentivizing creative efforts (the `owner-user balance’).” WPIX, 691 F.3d at 287. > Elbakyan’s solution to the problems she identifies, simply making copyrighted content available for free via a foreign website, disserves the public interest. > As the Plaintiffs have established, there is a “delicate ecosystem which supports scientific research worldwide,” (Pl.'s Br., Dkt. No. 6 at 21), and copyright law pays a critical function within that system. “Inadequate protections for copyright owners can threaten the very store of knowledge to be accessed; encouraging the production of creative work thus ultimately serves the public’s interest in promoting the accessibility of such works.” WPIX, 691 F.3d at 287. The existence of Elsevier shows that publication of scientific research generates substantial economic value.
Bolded text my own. I think that Judge Sweet has a point here, in addition to having the U.S. Federal government backing him. Library Genesis is now illegal in both the U.S. and the U.K., and in the U.S. at least there is actually an active court order against “assisting, aiding, or abetting” them.
So I think it’s a fair position to say – just thinking about Textkit’s liability – “not on the public forum.” There’s a private messaging service if you want to have that sort of conversation.
I recently bought this book and have enjoyed it in immensely. But then again, I like to read dictionaries.
It is a great book for those with an interest in etymology and Indo-European or Proto-Greek morphology, but probably overkill for those with only a casual interest. For those with a casual interest, I would recommend Wiktionary, even for Greek. Another possibility is simply to make full use of the Liddell or Cunliffe dictionaries, which are excellent in listing what the roots of words are, even if they do not trace them back any further than Greek.
I am a geek of etymology for its own sake, but also use etymology as a strategy for learning vocabulary. I have etymological dictionaries for Latin, Coptic, and Old Chinese and well-used bookmarks for Old Irish. Beekes’ Etymological Dictionary of Greek is excellent on the basis of my experience.
For those interested in buying Beeke’s book, you might consider the following:
Threshold issues:
Pros:
It is very professional in tone and yet accessible to the non-specialist. I have been somewhat disappointed in other ancient Greek books I have purchased, for instance some on prosody and accents, because they are difficult to use for the non-specialist or for someone who is not a fluent reader of ancient Greek. This book on etymology is quite accessible even if your Greek is not fluent; in fact, it has almost no Greek text other than the specific words in question, and their various forms.
It treats not only the headwords, but often variant forms of the headwords. For verbs, it usually treats the various stems separately in its explanations.
It seems to be quite comprehensive. I am not a specialist, but the book seems to cover all roots from ancient times through the Koine period. It even tends to list cognates from a number of Indo-European families. Who knew, for instance, that ἔννεπε, inquam, and “say” are related. How about πὀντος, pontus, and “find”?
Though professionally conservative in his treatment, Beekes does not hesitate to refer to speculations about a given word’s etymology (e.g., Ατλας and επιοὐσιον).
Very mild cons:
It gives good information about the meaning of headwords and root words, but usually very little about any special meanings of prefixed verbs. In other words, a base verb will get extensive treatment, but its derivatives will usually get only the barest of references.
I was surprised at the relatively high number of words either lacking good etymologies or lacking Indo-European etymologies (e.g., ἀγάπη, ἄνθρωπος, ἄναξ, βασιλεύς, and θάλασσα).
I would have enjoyed more speculation about the precise meanings of preforms. You often have to surmise from the references to Indo-European morphology how the subtle semantics of verbs may have developed over time, but occasionally he provides it (e.g., επἰσταμαι).
There are a occasional tantalizing references to interesting discussions of other authors on various subjects, but without any summary of the substance. I, at least, am not enough of an amateur scholar to track them down or pay for them when I do (e.g., on page 388 at the bottom he says: “On the relation between εἶμι - ἐρχομαι - ἦλθον and other verbs of going, see Bloch 1940: 22ff.” I would love to know that Bloch said to know whether it is worth seeking out.
Thanks, Altair, that is extremely helpful (as I contemplate whether or not to buy this at its “reduced” but still mighty steep price). One question I have (in complete ignorance of the subject) about IE etymology books in general: How much if any study of Proto Indo-European or Sanskrit should I have to make much use of, in this case, a Greek etymology book?
Randy Gibbons
I didn’t provide a link I just mentioned Library Genesis. So do you, which is good so at least anyone who might want the pdf knows where to get it. 
I was discussing pre-Greek with a geneticist friend of mine (there is finally some archaic Greek DNA data coming out, he claims), and the sections in Beekes came in useful. He mentioned that the Greek words for “linen” and “pea” were likely pre-Greek, and I was able to verify that through Beekes – assuming that “pea” is κύαμος.
My friend’s claim to me is that the Indo-European expansion people didn’t do much agriculture, and picked up many of these words from the locals (the ones they kept around, mostly females, judging by mDNA, depending on where you’re talking about). He also claims that some of the direct cognates across IE families are likely this pre-Greek, pre Indo-European, farmer-substrate.
(as I contemplate whether or not to buy this at its “reduced” but still mighty steep price)
If your concern is about the absolute price of the book, don’t buy it! You can get a lot merely from using Liddell & Scott in the Perseus Digital Library online and paring it with Wiktionary, which has a lot of good information on Greek etymologies.
If your concern is about the relative price of the book, absolutely do buy it if you have any love of browsing around reference works! It simply has too much good and helpful information to pass up if you have such an inclination, It will be much more user friendly than hopping around Liddell and Wiktionary.
One question I have (in complete ignorance of the subject) about IE etymology books in general: How much if any study of Proto Indo-European or Sanskrit should I have to make much use of, in this case, a Greek etymology book?
I have maybe oversold the technical nature of the book. Perhaps jeidsath wouldn’t mind posting a representative page. Pending that, let me give some examples of what you kind find in some entries.
A few days ago, I was studying an online reference on particle usage and came across this passage from the “Catalogue of Ships” in the Iliad (Iliad 2.650-654):
650 τῶν μὲν ἄρ’ Ἰδομενεὺς δουρὶ κλυτὸς ἡγεμόνευε |
Μηριόνης τ’ ἀτάλαντος Ἐνυαλίῳ ἀνδρειφόντῃ· |
τοῖσι δ’ ἅμ’ ὀγδώκοντα μέλαιναι νῆες ἕποντο. |
Τληπόλεμος δ’ Ἡρακλεΐδης | ἠΰς τε μέγας τε |
ἐκ Ῥόδου ἐννέα νῆας ἄγεν | Ῥοδίων ἀγερώχων, |650 Of them, then, Idomeneus famed for his spear was leader,
and Meriones, peer of Enyalios, slayer of men,
and with them eighty black ships followed.
And Tlepolemus the Heraclid, strong and tall
from Rhodos led nine ships of noble Rhodians.
I stumbled on both the meaning and components of the word ἀτάλαντος, which the translation seems to give as “peer.” I decided to use Beekes’ Etymological Dictionary of Greek to look up the etymology.
Beekes’ work cross-references ἀτάλαντος to τάλαντον. Strangely, there is no headword for τάλαντον, but under τάλαντα, he says:
τάλαντα [n.pl.] 'scales, balance; (epic poet. Il.), also a designation of a unit of weight and currency, ‘talent’ (since Il.) > <<IE > > *telh₂- > ‘bear, endure’> >>
Later in the entry, after listing information on variants, he lists various compounds including ἀτάλαντος, where he says:
ἀ-τάλαντος ;having the same weight, equal’ (Il, Hell. epic).
Later still, he says:
ETYM > Properly “bearing”, a participial formation > *tlh₂-ent- > fromo [sic] the root > *telh₂- > in > >>ταλάσσαι> , etc.
From the above, we get that ἀτάλαντος means “having the same weight” or “equal,” which explains the translation “peer” above.
If we read some of the other information under τάλαντος and chase down the references, we find that there are a host of related words in Greek, Latin, and English, including τἀλας (“wretched”) ← “one who has endured the weight of much”), Τληπόλεμος (a personal name in the passage quoted above, perhaps meaning “bearing up/enduring in battle/war”), and perhaps Ἄτλας (the Titan who bears the weight of the world); tollo (“to bear or support”), tuli (“I bore”), latus (“borne”), tellus (“the earth that bears all”); “tolerate” and “relate.” Unfortunately, however, Beekes does not have room to list many cognates, and so you have to rely on your own knowledge or check through Wiktionary to get a glimpse of the full range.
One thing you will not get from Beekes is a direct explanation of the ἀ (with a smooth breathing) at the beginning of ἀτάλαντος. If you are smart enough to look for this letter at the beginning of the dictionary, you will find a number of possible entries, but none of the meanings are helpful and one is downright misleading. It turns out that the correct entry is ἁ (with a rough breathing). Here you will find that ἁ sometimes turns into ἀ, and that it has the following etymology:
ETYM > From IE > *sm> - in Skt. > sa- > (> sa-naman- > ;with the same name’), Lat > sem-> , > sim- > (simplex), from PIE > *sm> -, a zero grade to > *sem > in Skt > sam > ‘together’, > >>> εἷς> .
If you can pick through this, you can learn that the ἀ in ἀτάλαντος actually means “same” and is cognate with εἷς. With some digging, you can find that it is also cognate with a host of Greek, Latin, and English words, like: ἕτερος (“the other one”), ἕκατον (“hundred” ← “one ten of tens”); simile (“like” <-“of one kind”), simplex (one-fold) ; “same” (“of one kind”), “some,” and “simple.” Again, not all of the cognates are listed in Beekes.
At the risk of overkill, let me list one more example that helps show what is good and bad about Beekes.
I have always had trouble remembering the meaning of ἄτερ, I think because I mistakenly assume it is related to ὁ/ἡ/τό. In looking up ἄτερ in Beekes, I find the following:
ἄτερ [prep.] ‘without, far from’ (Il.). < *sn-ter> , > *snHu> , > *snHi > ‘without’>>
ETYM > A psilotic form (perhaps Aeolic) from *ἅτερ, identical with OHG > suntar > ‘separated, but’ < PIE > *sn-ter> . There was also a form > *snH(e)u > giving Greek >>ἄνευ…Again differently formed are ToA > sne> , ToB > snai > ‘without’, Lat. > sine > ‘id.’ < > *seni> , OIr. > sain > 'particular, different…The fact that the word is psilotic shows that it is a poetic (epic and Ionic) word.
There are many words and many abbreviations whose meanings will not be clear to someone new to PIE or the history of Greek dialects. For me, I know next to nothing about Tocharian A and B, but do recognize the Latin sine, the Old Irish sain , and especially the Old High German suntar. For some strange reason, Beekes fails to make clear that this latter word is even cognate to such English words as “asunder” and “sundry.”
Also for me, all these cognates and word connections make it easy to understand why ἄτερ means ‘without, far from’ and to inbed it in my memory. Memory is strengthened by association, no matter of what kind. Even the reference to psilosis (ψίλωσις) helps me. This word can refer to the fact that in Ionic, an initial S of a PIE root generally drops out without a trace, leaving a smooth (ψιλόν) breathing, even though it usually leaves a rough breathing in Attic and Koine Greek. Knowing none of this, you can still get an idea of where ἄτερ comes from and why it has nothing to do with ὁ/ἡ/τό.
To summarize, Beekes packs a lot of information into his entries. The more you know about etymologies, PIE, Indo-European languages, and the historical development of Greek, the more you can get out of it. Even without such knowledge, you can glean many interesting nuggets about how Greek words are related to each other and to many English words.
The more you know about etymologies, PIE, Indo-European languages, and the historical development of Greek, the more you can get out of it.
Thanks again, Altair, for taking the time for such an informative reply. To buy or not buy Beekes? In the end for me at least, it’s not as much a price question as a question of what I know - in my case, what I don’t know - about etymologies, PIE, etc. Which isn’t to say I don’t want to know more. Your word excursions are fascinating, and yes, one motivation for me is facilitating memorization of meanings through this type of association. (I happen to have The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots, and I do muck around in that from time to time.)
Joel, thanks also for that fascinating report from your geneticist friend. We all want to know where those amazing Greeks came from! I had my own ancestry tested years ago through the IBM/National Geographic Genome Project. Are you or your friend aware of any current scholarship summarizing the contribution of DNA studies to the question of IE and Greek in particular origins?
Randy Gibbons
I have consulted Beekes only once and found his entry unsatisfactory. See this thread on the Ionian Sea. Basically, Beekes fails to take note of the fact that Ionian (ιονιος) as in Ionian Sea and Ionian (ιωνιος/ιαων) as in Ionian dialect are most likely two different words. If you know French, I recommend Chantraine even if it’s old.
Paul, read the later messages in the thread. I think you’re representing Beekes slightly wrong, even if he’s not quite right in his reasoning. Beekes mostly translates Frisk there.
Only a few quick notes to the above:
There’s of course no space to open many references; but they are there to be checked for those interested. As such the book is already quite large in two volumes. You can check e.g. Bloch’s Zur Geschichte einiger suppletiver Verba im Griechischen in your local library.
English is Indo-Europeanistically an unimportant language. That’s why references to it are rarely made. Etymological dictionaries for English come in handy here.
How can it be a con if some words do not have Indo-European etymologies??
It’s true that reference can be made only to few words. One has to supplement the information with other sources, most importantly Pokorny (slightly old but still the best of its kind by a country mile), a treasure trove of words. There are then other pertinent sources for particular disciplines, such as Bartholomä (very old but still excellent; to be supplemented itself with Kent and Schmitt) or Mayrhofer, to name only two options.
As said many times already, Beekes is basically an English translation of Frisk with updates. All of the updates are hardly improvements, mind.
Speaking of that, Timothée, here is one of your comments from an earlier thread, that I wouldn’t mind seeing expanded upon, especially regarding the laryngeals, which Beekes makes a point of in the introduction:
Beekes is to large extent an “updated” version of Frisk. I use inverted commas as one may disagree with some of these “updates”, most notoriously those dreadful laryngeals. I like Beekes’s Pre-Greek approaches (now also in a self-standing monograph), though sometimes it may be difficult to say much conclusively.
Beekes came in for criticism from reviewers, justifiably it seemed to me, for seeing too much pre-greek substrate. Would you care to comment on that, Timo?
Historical linguistics not being my thing, I have rarely consulted Beekes (or Frisk). Like Paul Derouda I find Chantraine much more satisfactory, even though it’s significantly out of date. There was a time I was inclined to disbelieve in laryngeals altogether, but Cal Watkins and Brent Vine set me straight there.
Another heresy of mine was to derive εἴβω from λείβω, under metrical pressure, and αἶα from γαῖα likewise. I don’t know if that’s met with any approval. Probably not, philological methods being what they are, but I’m still attached to it.
I do think I can set you straight once again (Hittite is an important key). But probably not here.