Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

B. IE. 3rd sing. *dik-í-t, *wrt-i-t, *nem-i-t>Gc. *tiyi, wurði, *næmi>OHG. zige, wurti, nāmi>NHG. ziehe, würde, nähme (so-called preterit subjunctive).

NOTE. There never existed any difference in tense between these two subjunctive (optative) types. Both were without any tense signification and remained so much longer than the corresponding indicatives. After compound tenses had been establisht (55), both forms were gradually limited in use to present (or future) time; OHG. wāri could stand for the present as well as the past, and even in MHG. such use occurs now and then, but in general, the restriction of all simple (uncompounded) optative forms to the present took place during the OHG. time.

The modern, as well as the old, distinction between the functions of the two forms is one of manner, not of tense. The old contrast between continuous and momentary action which, in the case of the indicative, had become a characteristic of tense, now signifies different degrees of uncertainty with the optative forms, the old forms of continuity denoting personal impression (indirect discourse, purpose, admonition, solemn wish), and the old forms of momentary action—the so-called preterit subjunctives — referring to statements contrary to fact (unreal conditional sentences, unreal concession, ordinary wish, now and then also possibility, etc.). On account of their distinctive forms, the 'preterit subjunctives' have been gradually encroaching upon the original sphere of the 'present subjunctives,' especially in indirect discourse; this, however, belongs to descriptive rather than to historical grammar.

[ocr errors]

53. The Personal Endings. The most important IndoEuropean endings were: mi or -ō, -si, -ti; -mes, -the, -nti. In this form, the endings appear chiefly in the indicative of the present; elsewhere, certain conditions of the accent had brought about a weakening: -m, -s, -t; -men, -te, -nt. The full endings are called primary or absolute, the weakened, secondary or conjunct endings. - The singular of the perfect, which originally seems to have been a verbal noun, had the endings -a, -tha, -e.

Thru the reduction of final syllables, these endings

undergo considerable changes in Germanic, which lead to the following results:

Present Indicative:

1. IE. *nem-ō>OHG. nimu>NHG. nehme.

It is generally believed that in OHG. u, like i, caused a change of e to i; if so, the NHG. form is analogical.

IE. -mi is found in NHG. only in the form bin <bim. OHG. had also tuom, gām, stām, habēm, salbōm, etc.

2. IE. *nem-e-si>OHG. nimis>NHG. nimmst.

The addition of the (enclitic) pronoun of the second person was responsible for the modern ending -st: nimistu>nimmst.

Gc. i in the suffix caused mutation, according to 25 end and 38A. 3. IE. *nem-e-ti>OHG. nimit>NHG. nimmt. 4. IE. *nem-o-mes>OHG. nemamēs>NHG. nehmen. The OHG. form is not entirely explained.

5. IE. *nem-e-the>OHG. nemet, nemat>NHG. nehmt. Analogy. The form should be identical with the 3rd sing.

6. IE. *nem-o-nti>OHG. nemant>NHG. nehmen. -t was dropt by analogy with the 1st pl.; it is retained, as -d, in sind.

Preterit (perfect endings in perfect forms, conjunct endings in aorist forms):

1. IE. *ne-nom-a>OHG. nam>NHG. nahm. 2. IE. *nēm-(e)s>OHG. nāmi>NHG. nahmst.

The connecting vowel -e- of this aorist form really belonged to the verbs of the first three classes only, IE. *dik-e-s, *duk-e-s, *wrt-e-s, but was transferred to the long vowel aorists by analogy. The ending -st in NHG. was borrowed from the present.

The perfect ending IE. -tha is found in the preterit-presents, OHG. darft, kannt, maht, muost, scalt, since there had not been any aorist forms in these verbs.

3. IE. *ne-nom-e>OHG. nam>NHG. nahm.

4, 5, 6. OHG. nāmum, nāmut, namun>NHG. nahmen,

nahmt, nahmen.

The IE. forms are uncertain

probably they were *nem-men,

*nëm-te, *nēm-nt. The vowel of the ending of the Gc. second person is analogical.

Optative (conjunct endings):

A. OHG. neme, nemēs, neme; nemēm, nemēt, nemēn< IE. *nem-oi-m, *nem-oi-s, etc.

B. OHG. nāmi, nāmīs, nāmi; nāmīm, nāmīt, nāmīn< IE. *nēm-i-m, *nēm-i-s, etc.

In type A, mutation could not take place because IE. oi in unaccented syllables became OHG. e; in type B, mutation was necessary. In NHG., type A has practically given up those forms that are not sufficiently distinct from the indicative, and the forms in

-

[blocks in formation]

The Germanic imperative is not an independent form; the singular goes back to the stem form of the verb, without ending, IE. *nem-e; the plural forms are indicatives or subjunctives.

54. The Verbal Nouns. 1. The Germanic INFINITIVE was a noun of action (similar, in function, to the NHG. nouns in ung) with the suffix -no-, added to the stem of the verb: OHG. nem-a-n, zellen<*zal-ja-n, habēn, salbōn.

2. The PARTICIPLES were verbal adjectives with various IE. endings of which the following have been preserved in Germanic: nt (compare Lat. amant-, legent-) for the present participle (OHG. nemanti, habenti, salbōnti), -nofor the past participle of strong verbs (OHG. gi-noman), and -to- for the past participle of weak verbs (OHG.

gizalt, gihabet, gisalbot). The prefix gi- of the past participles denotes completion (see 57) and is probably related to Lat. com-, co- (conficio 'I complete').

Compare Wilmanns III, 1, § 9.

55. The Compound Tenses. A. The PERFECT. Being an adjective, the past participle could at all times be used predicatively in sentences with the verb 'to be' ('to seem,' 'to become,' etc.). But facts of logic caused a tense difference according to the aspect of the verb: With 'perfective' verbs (verbs of momentary action, especially of result) such sentences refer to a preceding action and are, therefore, 'perfect' as to tense; with durative verbs (verbs of continuous action) they refer to the present: 'He is slain' indicates perfect, 'he is liked,' present. Past participles could also be used as objective complements in sentences with 'to have.' The character of such sentences is clearly apparent from the fact that in the older language the participles take inflectional endings in agreement with the nominal object, e.g., OHG. sia eigun mir ginomanan (acc. sing. masc., 'genommenen') minan druhtin liaban 'sie haben mir meinen lieben Herrn genommen.'

Sentences of these two forms were by no means new types in Germanic; they were matters of course. Starting from them, however, there was developt in the Germanic languages, especially in German, a system of compound tenses of such abundance as to be somewhat cumbersome.

First, the verb 'to be' with the past participle of intransitive perfective verbs, and the verb 'to have' with the past participle of transitive verbs assumed the character of a specific tense of completed action: ich bin gekommen (= ein Gekommener), ich habe ihn gefangen (=als einen Gefangenen). In part, this is to be attributed to the fusion of the old 'perfect' tense with the old aorist

which had deprived the language of a specific form for completed action. - Durative intransitive verbs were constructed like transitive verbs (er hat geschlafen), but gradually the principle of distinction for the use of sein and haben was shifted somewhat, so that the present distinction is one of result obtained (thru motion or change of condition) versus action as such: er ist ins Wasser gefallener ist blaß geworden er hat geturnt. - The 'pluperfect' was developt simultaneously with the perfect.

[ocr errors]

NOTE 1. A few verbs, like sein and bleiben (in South German also stehen, sitzen, liegen, hangen, schweben, stecken, etc.) take sein, altho they do not express result. This was due to a newer tendency, which was carried thru incompletely, to lay stress on localized versus absolute action: er ist vor der Tür gestanden, but er hat lange gestanden. Compare Wilmanns II, 1, § 8; Sütterlin, § 268.

NOTE 2. In South German, the complete loss of final -e destroyed the difference between the 3rd sing. of the present and preterit of regular weak verbs: er lebt- er lebt(e). This was the chief reason that the preterit (even of strong verbs) was given up altogether in South German (and largely in Middle German), the perfect form being used not only for completed action, but also as a historical tense: ich bin gestern dort gewesen. A new pluperfect was formed on this basis: ich habe ihn gesehen gehabt, ich bin gegangen gewesen.

NOTE 3. Certain strong verbs (e.g., kommen, werden, treffen, lassen) originally formed their past participles without the prefix ge-; apparently, this became the starting-point for the 'double infinitive' forms in the compound tenses of the modal auxiliaries and similar forms, which have developt since the 15th century: ich habe ihn kommen lassen led to constructions by analogy like ich habe ihn kommen sehen, hören, ich habe kommen wollen, sollen, müssen, etc. Undoubtedly, however, the close logical connection between the two verbs was a contributory cause, tending towards a parallelism of forms.

B. The FUTURE had no form of its own in Germanic (nor in Indo-European), aside from the fact that the

« PoprzedniaDalej »