av as a particle of reference is naturally enough repeated with the different predicative words; thus in Thucyd. II. 41, we find doxɛiv äv μοι τὸν αὐτὸν ἄνδρα ἐπὶ πλεῖστ ̓ ἂν εἴδη, καὶ μετὰ χαρίτων μάλιστ ̓ ἂν εὐτραπέλως τὸ σῶμα αὐταρκες παρέχεσθαι. The most curious and most instructive instance of this hyperbaton is the intrusion of ❝v, which belongs to an optative following, into the phrase οὐκ οἶδ ̓ εἰ=vereor ut. Euripides has οὐκ οἶδ ̓ ἂν εἰ πείσαιμι in two passages (Medea, 911, Alcestis, 49), but it is clear that the necessities of the metre have obliged him to misplace the particle, which certainly ought to follow the negative, as appears from Plato, Timæus, p. 26 Β: ἐγώ, ἃ μὲν χθὲς ἤκουσα, οὐκ ἂν οἶδ ̓ εἰ δυναίμην ἅπαντα ἐν μνήμῃ πάλιν λαβεῖν, and from the somewhat similar passages in Demosthenes, de Fals. Legat. p. 441, 21: οὐδ ̓ εἷς εὖ οἶδ' ὅτι φήσειεν, and Proæm. p. 1423, 14: οὐδὲν ἂν τὰ ὑμέτερ ̓ εὖ οἶδ' ὅτι βέλτιον σχοίη. The ἄν appears unattracted in Aristoph. Aves, 1018: οὐκ οἶδά γ ̓ εἰ φθαίης ἄν. The particle xiv is distinguished from av by its tendency to assume an early place in the sentence. It is put before many words to which av is regularly subjoined; thus as Hermann justly remarks (Opuscul. IV. p. 7), if Syagrus (Herodotus, vII. 159) had not been desirous of making a line ἦ κε μέγ ̓ ὠμώξειεν ὁ Πελοπίδης Αγαμέμνων in imitation of Homer's ἦ κε μέγ' οιμώξειε γέρων ἱππηλάτα Πηλεύς (Iliad v. 125), he would have said ή μέγα ἂν ὠμώξειεν. ΑΛ CHAPTER VI. THE NEGATIVE AND OTHER PARTICLES. § 188 Grimm's remarks on negative particles. 189 Má, μý, vý, vai, and ov-x. 190 Interrogative particles, and their connexion with the nega tives. 191 Particles used in answers to questions. 192 Inferential particles. 193 Other words indicating progression or continuance. 194 Copulative conjunctions sometimes due to the same connexion of thought; 195 but generally derived from the indefinite and relative pronouns. 196 Identity of na and que. 197 Use of tɛ as an affix to relative words. 198 Different origin of te and tot. 199 Disjunctive particles. 200 Comparisons. 201 Distributive particles. 202 Pronominal origin of dý. Temporal particles. 203 The concessive particle ys. 204 Tάg and do̟a. 205 The hypothetical ɛ. 188 IN the last chapter we were led, by an investigation into the origin of the prepositions avά and xarά, to make some remarks as well on the particles v and xv, as on the negative uses of the word a-vá, and its abridged or mutilated forms. We shall commence our inquiries, upon the important subject of the Greek particles in general, by a reference to what we said there, as a natural introduction to the extensive question respecting the words which express interrogation, negation and inference, which, we shall find, are all connected in the Greek and cognate languages. Grimm, at the end of the third volume of his great work, has discussed this question with that extraordinary diligence and learning which he everywhere displays. We refer our readers to what he says with the greater pleasure, as this part of his work has been rendered accessible to the English reader, and commented on, by a scholar of considerable ability (Philol. Museum, II. pp. 315 foll.). We shall make the German philologer's inquiries the basis of our own on the present occasion; for, although we do not think that he has seen the general principle by which all the phenomena are to be explained, and although he has in consequence fallen into some particular errors, such are his learning and indefatigable industry, that we could not hope to add much by our own researches to the vast induction of particulars which he has collected and arranged. He commences by stating (m. p. 708) the distinction between a negation and an opposition; the latter includes the former, but not vice versa. "The essence of the proper negation consists in the logical denying of a position. By the expression not mountain, not good, the position mountain, good is excluded, but it is left indefinite, whether the opposite valley, evil, or the intermediate notion plain, middling, is to be supplied." He adds, "All negation proceeds from the grounds of the position, and presupposes it. The position is independent, the negation necessarily refers to a position, and cannot be expressed as anything new, but merely as a modification of the position. This modification results from an insertion in the positive position, which insertion in the first instance consists of the smallest possible particle, producing an effect both rapid and sure. By degrees, however, this negative particle is usually connected very closely with other words. Along with it we often find substantives that strengthen the sense, which can even take the negativing power from it to themselves." He then divides the simple negation in the Teutonic languages into two kinds-the consonant-form and the vowelform. The fundamental letter of the consonant-form is N. Thus, in Gothic it was nê, in High German nein-ni-ein (so non, anciently nenum, from ne-unum*), and in old English ne. The German nicht, English not, are compounds signifying no-thing; compare the old High German nêowiht, niowicht, nicht; middle High German nicht, niht; Anglo-Saxon nâviht, nâuht, nauht; English nought, not (Phil. Mus. I. p. 326). Of a similar formation is the Latin nihil: =nehilum. The English no is a compound of ne and the Anglo-Saxon & (Gothic ai, aio, comp. alFei, aevum), which signifies always; ev-er contains the same element. The middle High German prefix endoes not we conceive arise from the old High German n' for ni, nor do we think it is analogous to the formation of ἐμοῦ, ἐμοί, ἐμέ, from μov, uoí, ué (Grimm, p. 711). It is, we believe, the fuller form of the negation (compare ά-vá), and is connected with the German un-, ent-, Latin in-. Grimm himself compares the old High German interrogative innû, inû, ëno with the Gothic annu, and sees nothing strange in the substitution of i in old High German for a in Gothic (ш. p. 757). The vowel-form of the simple negation is a suffix -at, -a or -t, one or other of the two component letters being occasionally omitted. This suffix is peculiar to the old Norse. It is probably, as Grimm supposes (p. 718), a corruption of vátt, which is used to strengthen the negation, like the German wicht, and the fundamental negation is omitted, as the French negative is before pas, point, rien, * Whether we accept this etymology or not, there is no objection to it from the use of the word as a mere negative, having no relation to unity in particular, e. g. in non multi, for in these compound negatives the adjunct is very little regarded. Thus, although it is clear that nemo= ne-homo, Virgil does not scruple to write nemo divôm (Eneid 1x. 6). in pas un mot, point du tout, rien du tout. The prohibitive negation is in Gothic ni as in ni grêt! (μý xλałe); old High German the same as in ni churi! (noli); in middle High German the prefix en as in en ruoche! (noli curare); in Anglo-Saxon it is ne, frequently strengthened by a following nâ=në-â (never), thus në rêp þu nâ, "weep not.” Grimm's general conclusion is as follows (p. 743): "On the whole, then, there are two sorts of negation. The one quite formal and abstract, which, though at first the soul of all negation, vanishes by degrees in its separate use, and only continues its influence in connexion with other particles. It is superseded by words which properly contain the idea of less, little, small, either quite concretely, or perhaps in a more abstract sense. At first they are only united as companions to the negative particle, and coalesce into an equally abstract form, of which our new High German nicht, new Netherland niet, English not is the most striking example. Frequently, however, they dispense with the simple negative, and make a formal negation out of their diminutive-sense, as is especially shown in the Norse icke. This interlacing of the formal, and, as it were, material negation, explains to us two phenomena: on the one hand, the repetition of the negative-particle, and, on the other, its complete dispensableness. If our new High German weder (neque)=old High German niwëdar, middle High German wan (nisi)=newan, the Gothic ïbai=nibái: in like manner we have seen that also stoup ('an atom'), wint, tuivel ('devil')*, and the old Nordish vætr ('demon,' 'genius') serve as negatives without any preceding abstract negation. The formal negation is therefore unessential." the If now we compare this ni, në, of the German dialects with the Greek negative prefix vŋ- and with the second syllable of ά-vά, we shall have no difficulty in recognising their identity. We have before mentioned, that the middle High German prefix en- points to a fuller form corresponding to the whole of a-vá. The form (ně) of the simple negative occurs in Latin in the combination ne-quidem with a word interposed, and also in the compounds non, neque, &c. 189 In the German dialects we have seen that the prohibitive does not differ from the simple negative: the same is the case in the Latin nê, except that the vowel is long. In Hebrew also the prohibitive involves the same element as the negative (above, § 184). In Greek the prohibitive is un, in Sanscrit mâ, and in Persian me. The analogy of the German dialects might lead us, at first * Just as "Devil a bit," is used in vulgar English to signify "not at all." sight, to seek for some connexion between μý, and nê, as Grimm has done (p. 745). But, when we consider that uά and vý are used in direct opposition to one another in oaths, and compare μív and vív, the distinction between which we have pointed out before, we are compelled to seek for some way of explaining the word uý less obvious but less objectionable than that of a transformation of n into m. In the ordinary use of μá and vý, the former refers to a negative oath, the latter to a positive one; moreover vaí, which bears the same relation to vn that daí does to dý, is always used in a positive sense, like the Latin næ. The question tí unv; is generally used with a negative application; uv, which is used as a form of swearing, is mostly found in a positive sense. With regard to ud we believe, with Passow, that it is, in itself, neither affirmative nor negative, but gains either the one sense or the other according as it has vai or où prefixed or understood. In our opinion uá contains the element of the first personal pronoun; it represents an original uέv, which is used for μýv in Herodotus, and bears the same relation to uɛ-tά that xά or xέv does to xa-tá: so that the leading idea is that of absolute nearness to the subject. If vaí, vý, are, as we have no doubt they are, connected with the second syllable of a-vá, and the negative prefix vn-, the idea conveyed by these particles must be quite the reverse; for the leading meaning of viv, -va, vn- is, as we have already shown, that of "distance," "separation." Grimm says (II. p. 767), "the seemingly negative form of the affirmative vai (Lat. nae!) is worthy of notice; we might compare vai and où with the Gothic nê and jai, except that the meaning is reversed. If we take the Hessian änä, in connexion with the Swabian et=net, and the identity between the negative and positive expression which occasionally presents itself, there results apparently a deep-founded identity between the negative and affirmative particle, which I purposely forbear to investigate farther." All prima facie difficulty occasioned by this fact vanishes when we recollect that the prefix vη- is used with an intensive or affirmative signification, and in general "yes" and "no" are only emphatic expletives, which may be expressed by the two most definite pronominal words ma and na, signifying separation and distance, as well as by any one of those simple words by which we affirm or deny in our common conversation. Our own "yes" is simply the second pronoun, denoting "here," opposed to "no," the strongest form of the third element, just as yɛ and xa-tά are used with an affirmative sense, in opposition to ἀ-νά and ἀπό=ἀν-νό or va-πό. In order to explain uý, we must turn our attention to the other and more direct negative où, and consider what are the leading and fundamental distinctions between the two particles. |