i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i
i “Prelims” — // — : — page iii — # i EXTRACTEDFROM i i
Multi Nominis Grammaticus
Studies in Classical and Indo-European linguistics in honor of
Alan J. Nussbaum on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday
edited by Adam I. Cooper, Jeremy Rau and Michael Weiss
Beech Stave Press Ann Arbor New York •
i i
i i
i i
i i i i i “GarciaRamonMNG”“TOC” — / —/—//:——: page— v page — # —# i
i i
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
Table of Contents
Preface ...... vii Bibliography of Alan Nussbaum ...... ix List of Contributors ...... xi
, Live Life and Die Death: Case Selection of Cognate Accusatives Todd Clary and Datives in Ancient Greek...... , Latin danunt ...... Michiel de Vaan , Zur Herleitung von lateinisch ¯ebrius ‚trunken‘ Heiner Eichner und s¯obrius ‚nüchtern‘ ...... , In Defense of Celtic /φ/...... Joseph F. Eska , Equivalent Formulae for Zeus Margalit Finkelberg
in Their Traditional Context...... ˘
, Pre-Italic *-dhi¯e˘ (*-dhieh ) Benjamin W. Fortson IV ˘ 1 versus Pre-Indo-Iranian *-dhi¯oi: Bridging the Gap ...... , Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, José Luis García Ramón PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ and Related Forms ...... 1 , Analogical Changes in the History
Guðrún Þórhallsdóttir
˘
of Old Icelandic fela ...... ˘ ˘
, Indogermanisch *h k-u-o-s˘ ,*h ek-u-o-s ‚Pferd, Hengst, Stute’: Olav Hackstein 1 1 Genusindifferenz als morphologische Persistenz ...... ff, The Tocharian Subjunctive and Preterite in *-a- ...... Jay H. Jasano , The Indo-European, Anatolian, and Tocharian “Secondary” Ronald I. Kim Cases in Typological Perspective ...... , Fashioning a Coda: Repetition of Clitics Jared S. Klein and Clitic-like Elements in the Rigveda ...... , The Vedic Paradigm for ‘water’...... Alexander Lubotsky , Cutting around “temós”: Evidence from Tocharian...... Melanie Malzahn , Hittite “Heteroclite” s-Stems...... H. Craig Melchert , Zum urindogermanischen Wort für ‚Hand‘ ...... Sergio Neri v
i i
i i i i i “GarciaRamonMNG”“TOC” — / —/—//:——: page — vi page — # —# i i i Contents
, A Note on Indo-European In-Laws ...... Birgit Anette Olsen , Palatalization of Labiovelars in Greek ...... Holt Parker , Aristophanes, Thesmophoriazusae ...... Hayden Pelliccia , Send in the Nouns ...... Martin Peters , The Lady (Almost) Vanishes ...... Georges-Jean Pinault , Notes on State-Oriented Verbal Roots, the Caland System, Jeremy Rau and Primary Verb Morphology in Indo-Iranian and Indo-European ...... , Sekundäre denominale u-Stämme im Hethitischen ...... Elisabeth Rieken , An Early “Ingvaeonic” Innovation ...... Don Ringe , Verse Segments and Syntactic Templates Aaron P. Tate in Homeric Philology ...... , Thoughts on the Virgilian Hexameter...... Richard F. Thomas , A Hoarse of a Different Color (Plautus, Poen. ravi¯ ¯o)...... Brent Vine , Etruscan Genitives in -a and -al...... Rex E. Wallace , Interesting i-Stems in Irish ...... Michael Weiss , Lycian χawa- ‘sheep’ ...... Kazuhiko Yoshida
Index Verborum ......
vi
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Opiter aftero Lat. , OHG ‘later’, PIE h op(i)-tero- † * 1 ‘the one after’ and Related Forms The Roman praenomen Opiter, gen. Opetris, attested in literary texts and in inscrip- . tions, was understood by the Romans as a designation for a son born after his father’s death who had a still living grandfather. They implicitly assumed that the name re- flected a normal appellative, even if it is not attested as such in Latin, and interpreted it as a possessive compound ‘the one who has his grandfather (o° as a variant of auus) as his father (°piter)’. This is certainly a fine attempt to explain the name ex Latino ipso, but it faces serious objections from the point of view of our modern-day un- derstanding of phonology and word formation (§). Juret’s alternative explanation, which derives Opiter by haplology from *opi-piter “né après la mort du père”, has the advantage of operating with *opi, but has found no broad acceptance. In fact, the name is nowadays considered to be without a convincing etymology. The aim of the present paper is to propose an interpretation of Opiter (and of the putative appellative *opiter) as a contrastive -tero-formation built on PIE *h op-, 1 *h opi- ‘after’, namely PLat. *op-tero- or *opi-tero-. The synchronic sense of opiter is a 1 specialization of an original meaning ‘the one after’, which may only be established with the help of comparison beyond the borders of Latin and Italic. The dossier of Opiter is fairly limited: the name is attested in Livy (Opiter Uerginius .., .., cf. Fest. p. ., . L), Varro (Opiter Oppius, cf. Fest. p. L), Silius Italicus (.), and Quintilian (..), as well as three times in inscriptions (CIL I , , : Praeneste). At least one other name may be connected with
†This article has been written as part of the Research Project SGR (Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona). A sub-section of this text was delivered as the Loeb Lecture “Indo-European Continuity in Greek and Latin Onomastics,” on April th, to the Department of Classics at Harvard University. It is a pleasant duty to express my gratitude to Ignasi-Xavier Adiego Lajara (Barcelona), H. Craig Melchert (UCLA), Alexander Nikolaev (Harvard), Matilde Serangeli (Köln), Prods O. Skjærvø (Harvard), Michael Weiss (Cornell), and Alan J. Nussbaum (Cornell), who was of course not aware of where this paper would appear, for their remarks and criticism. My warm thanks also go to Karolina Gierej, Marina Schwark, and especially Lena Wolberg (Köln) for her invaluable help in the material preparation of the manuscript. Juret :. Only Lindner :. Bader :f.; Salomies : (“Es ist wohl nicht möglich, Opiter sicher zu erklären”); Schmitt :. The name is not mentioned in de Vaan s.v. pater. References taken from Salomies :f.
From Adam Cooper, Jeremy Rau, and Michael Weiss (eds.), Multi Nominis Grammaticus: Studies in Classical and Indo- European linguistics in honor of Alan J. Nussbaum on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday. Copyright © Beech Stave Press, Inc. All rights reserved. i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i José Luis García Ramón
(or derived from) Opiter, namely 'Οπ τερος (Diod. Sic.), actually the Greek form of a Latin noun Opiterus*. On the other hand, any connection of Opiter with the MN Opitor* (: 'Οπ τωρ, Dion. Hal. ..), Opit¯orius* (: 'Οπιτèριος, Cass. Dio .) must be ruled out: 'Οπ τωρ could reflect either an agent noun in -tor- or a “short form” of a compound (perhaps opitulus P. Fest p. . L opitulus Iuppiter et Opitulator dictus est, quasi opis lator), and neither of these possibilities applies to Opiter, because Italic, unlike Greek, only has evidence for agent nouns in -tor and not in -ter.
The ancient tradition is unanimous in interpreting Opiter as a compound of °pater, . designating its bearer as someone possessed of a dead father but a living grandfather when he was born:
Lib. de praen. : Opiter
The assumption of a connection with pater would appear to be strengthened by the fact that the paradigm of opiter fits, despite some variation (gen. Opiteris or Opitris GL Keil ., abl. Opitre (?) Fest. p. L, gen. Opetris in abbreviations), into the pattern
of the rd declension. On the other hand, a protoform *auo-pater˘ -(auus, pater) ‘whose
father is a grandfather (auus)’, whence *au-piter˘ and finally opiter with a (non-urban) development *au > ¯o is excluded, as unequivocally shown by the short scansion of /o-/ in Silius Italicus (.. sternuntur leto atque Opiter, quos Setia colle). The same
difficulty applies obviously to the theoretical alternative *au-pater-˘ ‘the one whose father is gone’ (cf. au° of au-fer¯o ‘I carry away’), as Alan Nussbaum kindly points to me (per litteras).
Once the possibility of tracing opiter back to a compound with auo˘ ° is excluded, the fact that it follows the rd declension does not necessarily imply the existence of a compound with second member °pater. This may be the result of the reanalysis within Latin of an old term, namely an original adjective with contrastive *-tero- (§) which had become opaque, and was secondarily associated with pater, as I will try to show.
Perhaps also Opiternius, the name of a Faliscan involved in the Bacchic conspiracy (Liv. .), if it is not to be read as Opicernius (Schulze :). Cf., in the context of other clearly Latin names, Diod. Sic. Bibl. Hist. .. ν `ΡèµV δ ØπÁρχον Ûπατοι 'Οπ τερος Λουκρ»τιος κα ΛεÚκιος Σργιος Φιδηνι£της. The Greek MN 'Οπ την (Il. ., cf. 'Οπ της: Ôνοµα κÚριον Suda) is surely to be kept apart, as it is connected with Ôπις ‘looking at, revenge’, cf. the MN Hom. ∆ηι-οπ της (perhaps “der sich an den Feinden rächt” as Leukart : n. has suggested). Cf. also Quint. Inst. .. scrutabitur ille praeceptor acer atque subtilis origines nominum: quae ex habitu corporis Rufos Longosque fecerunt . . . et ex casu nascentium (hic Agrippa et Opiter et Cordus et Postumus erunt). See Salomies :ff. Mommsen :, Solmsen :. Cf. recently Salomies :; Weiss :.
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
Latin nouns and adjectives in -ter may be continue *-tero- (and even *-toro-), but . not *-tor-. Let us recall here the case of OLat. Ferter, the name of the king of the Aequicoli and founder of the ius fetiale. This name has always been explained as an erroneous spelling of fertor (agentive *bhér-tor-), but simply reflects a contrastive *bher- tero- ‘better’ (Hom. φρτερος, also φριστος; Av. bairišta-), as I have argued elsewhere. These arguments may be briefly summarized here. The form (ILLRP , Rome, st cent. ) is perfectly legible and, as a lectio difficilior, must be authentic, although the ancients transmitted it as Fertor (Lib. de praen.I Recitant [scil. qui dis- sentiunt a Varrone] ab Aequicolis Septimum Modium primum eorum regem et Fertorem Resium, qui ius fetiale constituit) and this form has become currently accepted. In fact Ferter, like its gentilic Fertrius (AT. FERTRIO CIL I ., Capena) is a real form, which must be kept apart from a putative Fertor. The gentilic of this latter is attested as Hert¯orius (with h for f; vasa arretina CIL XI , , ), a perfect reflex of the productive pattern -tor :: -t¯orius (type Sertor :: gent. Sert¯orius). Since appella- tives in -ter (used also as names) are not agent nouns, but actually reflect formations in *-tero- (e.g. magister/minister, dexter, sinister) or in *-tri- (e.g. campester, equester, siluester), OLat. Ferter may be easily traced back to *bhér-tero- and perfectly match Hom. φρτερος ‘better, prominent’. Both terms make a perfect equation, and the same applies to Hom. φριστος : Av. (º)bairišta- ‘excellent’, for which neither the form nor the semantics causes any difficulty. The semantic motif of Ferter recurs in the Latin gentilics Melior, Optumus/Optimus, Excellens, and Egregius. Hom. φρτερος ( ) and φρτατος ( ) modify the names of prominent persons × × and divinities. The same applies to Hom. φριστος ( ; also MN Φριστος Plut.) × and to Av. (°)bairišta- ( , with niž° und aibi°), which characteristically occur in ×
the vocative (φριστε , pl. φριστοι, probably also YAv. bairišta in Yt. .). Cf. Il. × e
. τ ς δ σÚ σσι φριστε θεîν Óς µ' ερεαι ¥ντην and Yt. .– rašnuu¯o dura¯ ¯edaršt ma
e e e e
rašnuu¯o † ar e θamat (v.l. ar θ mat F; r θmat J) bairišta rašnuu¯o taii¯ um¯ nijaγništa ˜ ˜ ˜ “O Rašnav, (der) du dem Beklagten am besten beistehst” (Wolff). The form φρτερος (cf. προφερ»ς ‘distinguished’, προφερστερος,-τατος to προφρειν) may reflect intransitive φρειν or a transitive sense with ellipsis of an object (Fr. l’em- porter sur, Germ. es bringen, Am. Engl. bring it!, bring it on!). The same applies to OAv.
García Ramón forthcoming a. Recte Peruzzi : “non . . . un errore, . . . ma copia fedele della forma originale.” In De uiris illustribus, the form is transmitted as .sg. fertur (. ... quod primus fertur Rhesus excogitasse). Salomies :; Ampolo : (“l’esatto corrispondente di un inusitato fertor”); Palmer : (“fertor, not ferter, should match Umb. aˇrfertur and be connected with arferia, a religious term quoted by Festus L., and with Lat. ferre, adferre ‘legem ferre’, ‘rogationem ferre’, lator [scil. legis, rogationis]”). With prominent persons: Il. . σÍ τε β V κα χερσ κα γχεϊ φρτερος εναι; Il. . ξ λεθ', ο χερσ ν τε β ηφ τε φρτατοι Ãσαν; Il. . τ ς δ σÚ σσι φριστε καταθνητîν ¢νθρèπων. With divinities: Il. . κα λαιψηρÕν Òντα: θεο δ τε φρτεροι ¢νδρî; Hes. Th. Óσσον φρτατÒς στι θεîν κ£ρτει τε µγιστος; Il. . τ ς δ σÚ σσι φριστε θεîν Óς µ' ερεαι ¥ντην; Prods O. Skjærvø, however, points out to me variae lectiones that make the text rather unclear in his opinion.
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i
José Luis García Ramón
e e e
aib¯ı.bairišt e m, YAv. nižbairišto, cf. Y. .a vohu¯ xšaθr m vair¯ım bag¯ m aib¯ı.bairišt m ...
“the good command, which is what most (often) brings the well-deserved share”;
e e
Yt. . ma˛θr¯o sp e nt. ¯o mainii uu¯ım druj m nižbairišt¯o “the revitalizing divine thought,
which most (often) gets rid of the druz in the other world” (Skjærvø).
OLat. ferter : Hom. φρτερος and Hom.˘ φριστος : Av. bairišta- have a semantic par-
allel in Hitt. nakki- ‘important’ (*h nok-i-)˘ which also frequently modifies prominent
1
˘ persons and gods.˘ Hitt. nakki- (*h nok-i-) obviously belongs to a different lexeme, 1 namely IE *h nek-/*h enk-, originally ‘take, reach’. This lexeme has been integrated 1 1
into the suppletive paradigm of *bher- in Greek (φερο/ε- :: aor. νεγκ-ο/ε-, perf. ν»νοχα) e
and in Avestan (bar :: nas, s-aor. naš¯ -), cf. Y. .a y¯e ma˛θra¯ vac¯ m mazda¯ barait¯ı “the disciple who raises his voice, O Wise One” (Humbach) beside Y. . yaθa ¯ıža vacim¯
naš¯ ¯ıma yaθa va¯ saošiiant. ¯o daxiiun´ am˛ suiiamna vacim¯ bar e nti. “Like the ¯ıža¯, may we (now) lift our voice! or the way the revitalizers of the lands, who are being revital-
ized, lift their voice” (Skjærvø). It is noteworthy that Baltic and˘ Slavic reflect the disiecta membra of a former sup- pletive paradigm *bher-:*h nek-. On the one hand, Lith. nèšti, nešióti ‘bear, bring’ 1 and OCS nesti ‘φρειν, βαστ£ζειν’, nositi have the semantics of *bher-: Lith. nèšti kám pagálba˛ ‘bring help to someone’, OCS (Mk. :) i prido˛ k¥ njemu nos˛ešteoslabljen¥ ži- lami “κα ρχονται πρÕς αÙτÕν παραλυτικÕν φροντες” (: Go. jah qemun at imma usliþan bairandans). On the other hand, residual forms in Baltic reflect the old sense of *bher-,
namely OLith. bernas ‘child’, bernulis ‘id.’, Latv. b¯erns ‘id.’.
˘
To sum up: OLat. ferter matches Hom. φρτερος (PIE˘ *bhértero-). Their colloca- tions are the same as Hitt. nakki- ‘important’ (*˘ h nok-i-) derived from PIE *h nek- 1 1 originally ‘take (with himself)’. The root *h nek- forms a suppletive paradigm with 1 *bher- in Greek and Avestan, and residually, in Baltic and Slavic. OLat. ferter is an old term, which became opaque (no longer synonymous with Melior, Optimus) and was wrongly reinterpreted as Fertor within Latin.
Latin Opiter may be interpreted as a relic form, reflecting an inherited adjective . PItal. *op-tero- or *opi-tero- ‘the one after’. This proto-form has a close correspondence in (and may even match) OHG aftero ‘id.’, a contrastive derivative in *-tero- of the adverb *h op or *h op-i ‘over, on, thereupon, in addition’, whence ‘(close) behind’ (lo- 1 1 cal) and ‘next, later’ (temporal). Lat. opiter thus means ‘the later one’ (originally the next in time) by opposition to other(s), irrespective of the exact form to which it may be traced back, either *h op-tero- (as in Germanic) or *h opi-tero-. This interpretation 1 1 presupposes (and depends on) three hypotheses that need to be verified: (a) the ex-
Also with a negative reading ‘heavy (to endure)’, like Lith. naštà ‘burden’.
Cf. VBoT i – apaš™¯ ua˘ DUMU-YA [na]kkiš “This son of mine is important/great for me”; KUB . i – [z]ik™uza dUTU URUArinna nakkiš DINGIR-LIM-iš nu™tta™kkanŠUM-an lamnaš ištarna nakki “You, Sun-goddess of Arinna, are a revered goddess. Your name is revered among men.” García Ramón :ff., ff.; :ff.
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
istence of PIE *h op(i) ‘thereupon, in addition, later’, different from *apo/u (*h ep- or 1 2 *h ep-) ‘off, away’ and ‘back’ (§), even if this sense has been lost in Lat. ob, obs and 1 Osc. , up (§); (b) evidence for an inherited adjective *h op(i)-tero- ‘later’, with the úp 1 meaning ‘born later, younger’, supported by parallel formations with other suffixes (§); and (c) a development within Latin leading from a PItal. *op-tero- or *opi-tero- to a rd-declension noun opiter,-tris, and not †opter,-tr¯ı. A deadverbal protoform *op- tro- or *opi-tro- (cf. Go. aftra ‘ες τ¦ Ñπ σσω, δεÚτερον’) is phonetically possible, but less plausible from the point of view of Latin word-formation (§).
An adverb (and preverb) PIE *op, actually a root-noun *h op-, with locative *h ep-i . 1 1 (and *h op-i), in the sense ‘on, over, thereupon’ (superposition), ‘in addition, next’ 1 (contiguity), whence ‘behind’ (local), ‘later’ (temporal), is well attested in several Indo-European languages: in Greek (Ñπ /π ) and Lycian (epñ-), the initial o-vocalism is beyond doubt. The same applies to Lat. ob, obs ‘towards, in front of; on account of, because’ or PSabell. *op- (Osc. , op : ‘at’), although their meanings do not match úp those of *h op(i). The semantics remain a real difficulty, but the formal match is evident 1 (§). A distinct adverb, with different meaning, PIE *apo/u ‘away, off’, and ‘behind, back’, clearly reflected by Gk. ¢πÒ/Ú, ¥ψ and Lat. ab, abs°, may be traced back either to *h ep- or to *h ap- (in what follows, it will be conventionally quoted as *apo). 2 1 In the Anatolian languages other than Lycian, in Indo-Iranian, and in Germanic, adverbs with initial /a-/ (Hitt. ap(p)-, PIIr. *ap-, PGmc. *af-) may formally be traced back either to *h op or to *ap-. Only a close observation of the formations and mean- 1 ings may allow us to decide for *h op(i) or for *apo, at least in some cases. In other 1 cases, this turns out to be impossible, especially when both the forms (and meanings) have merged, as is the case for Ved. ápa and, in part for Gk. ¢πÒ (Il. .– ο δ' ¥ρα δεπνον λοντο ... 'Αχαιο /. . . , ¢πÕ δ' αÙτοà θωρ»σσοντο “. . . took their meal hastily . . . and after eating arrayed themselves in armor”; Hdt. .. οÙ γ¦ρ κοµîντες πρÕ τοÚτου ¢πÕ τοÚτου κοµ©ν “For not wearing their hair long before that, after that they wore their hair long”). Let us briefly review the evidence for the preverbs and their derivatives in the dif- ferent languages:
Greek: Ôπι(σ)θεν, Ôπισθε ‘(from) behind’ (e.g. Il. . νàν δ' ¤µα τ' αÙτ κα πολλ¦ . . διδο τ¦ δ' Ôπισθεν Øπστη “Now he offers you many gifts immediately, and has promised more hereafter”), Ñπ στατος ‘last’ (glossed as τελευταιÒτατον by the Suda), ‘hindmost’
Either by remodeling of *epí with introduction of the o-grade of the root noun *h op- (Hamp ), or 1 inversely, by addition of locatival -i to the root noun. It is well known that Lycian is the only Anatolian language where PAnat. *o has not merged with PAnat. *a, and is reflected as /e/. Dunkel –:. His conclusion, however, that Ñπ σσω is related to ¢πÒ, not to Ñπ does not seem cogent to me.
Irrespective of how old Ñπ στατος is, it may be basically equivalent to Lat. optimus ‘best’ < *op(i)-tmH-o-˚
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i José Luis García Ramón
(αν ¢ποκτε νων τÕν Ñπ στατον Il. ., .), also postclassical Ñπ στερος (Arat. , Nonn. D. .). The same sense is also recognizable in compounds, e.g. Myc. o-pi- ro-qo /opi-loikwo-/ ‘left behind’, Ñπèρα ‘late summer’ (*‘after the spring’). Hom. Ñπ σ(σ)ω ‘behind, backwards’, also ‘later’ (e.g. Il. .– τοÚτJ δ' οÜτ' ¨ρ νàν φρνες µπεδοι, οÜτ' ¥ρ' Ñπ σσω / σσονται “But this man’s understanding is not now firm,
nor even will it be hereafter”), a fossilized instrumental of *h opi-tio˘ - ‘later, posterior’ 1 (§.), may be related to the isolated gloss πισσον: τÕ Ûστερον γενÒµενον (Hsch.). A variant *h op-s- is also attested as *Ñψ- (like Lat. ops) in Ñψ ‘afterwards, late’ (: Aeol. 1 Ôψι), Ôψιος ‘late’ (Pind.+, also MN Οψιος : Myc. o-pi-si-jo), Ñψ ζω ‘to be late’ (Lys., Xen.), Ôψιµος ‘late in coming’, Ñψι° in compounds like Ñψ γονος ‘late arrival, younger’ (Hom.+), ÑψαρÒτης ‘one who plows late’ (Hes.). Gk. Ñπ(ι), Ñψ- are certainly to be kept apart from ¢πο,/ ¢πÚ ‘off, away’ (PIE *apo/u), cf. ¢πωτρω, ¥πωθεν ‘farther off’ (Soph.+), ¢πωτ£τω, ‘farthest from’ (τÁς Θρ®κης Dem. .).
Anatolian: Lyc. epñ ‘back, afterwards’ (: Hitt. appan¯ ‘after’), perepñ ‘further- . . more’, epñte ‘afterwards, thereafter’ (: Hitt. appanda¯ ‘left behind, back(wards)’, also appananda¯ ) point unmistakably to *h op-, and more precisely, to a loc. *h op-(e)n- , 1 1 ® whereas epi ‘upon’ goes back to *opi (cf. e.g. TL . meχistte™n˜e: ep[i]-tuwete: atli: ehbi: “Megistos set it up for himself.” On epñn˜ene/i- ‘younger brother’ cf. §.. Although the Anatolian languages other than Lycian provide us with forms which
are phonetically inconclusive, *h op(i) may be assumed for HLuv. api (adv.) ‘back, 1 ˘ behind’, and for the Hittite forms quoted above and also Hitt. appa-šiuatt- ‘in future, in after-days’. Hitt. appan¯ ‘after’ matches both formally and semantically Lyc. epñ and
must have the same origin (*h op-(e)n- ). On Hitt. appizi¯ ia-˘ ‘the youngest (son)’ cf. 1 ®
(Hamp :), if the latter means ‘topmost’: *‘the most on’ (Weiss :), and is not related to ops ‘resources’ (*h ep- ‘abundance’). 3 Morpurgo Davies : with n. (also on /opi/ ‘behind’ in o-po-qo /op¯okwoi/ ‘blinders’, o-pi-a -ra 2 /opihala/ ‘coastal regions’). With *°ohar-a-¯ (cf. *Hos-r/n-: Go. asans, OCS jesen¢), Myc. MN dat. o-po-re-i /Op¯orehi/(Ñπ , Ôρος, cf. PN Ñπèρεια) of *op-¯ores- ‘the one on the mountain’. Aliter Dunkel –:: Ñπ σσω from *ópo, a variant of *ápo ‘away, back, behind’. Schulze : n. .
Of Zeus (Il. .), also MN Οψιµος. The form must be kept apart from Ôψιµος ‘visible’ (Xen.+). ˘
Whether Greek Ñψι° and Ñψ, could be traced back to preforms of the type *opti-V-˘ and *optio- must
remain open. At least Ñψι(-) may have spread from compositional Ñψι° (*opti-V-˘ ). Melchert :f. (with a dossier of dubious forms, and references), .
For per°, cf. Hitt. pariia(n)˘ ‘beyond’, parranda ‘across’ (Melchert :). E.g. KBo. . iii appananda™patISBAT. “afterwards he seized” (Morpurgo Davies :). E.g. X. SULTANHAN § a-wa/i-sa / á-pi-i / CRUS-nú-wa/i-mi-na “He is to be set up afterwards,” and api asa- ‘be behind, remain’ (letters f + g, §§, ; Hawkins :).
Morpurgo Davies :; Dunkel –:. Hitt. appa¯ is basically directive, but like other adverbs ˘
in -a it may be used as a locative or a perlative, e.g. appa-ši¯ uatt-˘ or in the expression tuuan¯ para¯ ‘in advance, ahead of time” (kind indication of H. Craig Melchert).
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
§. The same goes for CLuv. apparanti- ‘future’, HLuv. apara(n)ta ‘hereafter, in the future’ (á-pa+ra/i-ta , POST+ra/i-), POST+ra/i-wa/i-sà-ti (KARKAMIŠ §).
Indo-Iranian: Ved. ápi ‘on, further’, Av. aip¯˘ı ‘also, later’, OP apiy ‘very’ per- . . mit the reconstruction of PIIr. *ápi, in spite of the semantic differences. The form is clearly different from *apa ‘off, far, away’ (Ved. ápa, Av. OP apa), although the dif- ference is not a clear-cut one in derivatives, where the senses ‘back’ and ‘off’ may over-
lap. In any case, Av. aip¯˘ı ‘later, after’ (with gen. abl.), matches Gk. Ñπ /π and clearly
e e
points to *h ep-i: Y. .ab ya¯ z¯ı vauu e r z¯oi pair¯ı ciθ¯ıt /... yac¯ a¯ var šait¯e aip¯ıciθ¯ıt “He 1 ˜ ˜ may consider (what) has been perpetrated (all) around (here) . . . and he may consider what will be perpetrated (by them) in the future” (Humbach). Cf. also Y. .bc
´šiiaoθanaiš¯ armait¯ ¯e / yaožda¯˚ ma.šiia¯˚ aip¯ıza˛θ e m “By your works, O Armaiti¯ (Earth) you purify mortal women after birth.”
The same applies to YAv. ape (with acc.) in opposition to para ‘before’: Y. . e
ape am .e šanam˛ sp ntan. am˛ dah¯ ¯ım “After the dahi¯ of the Life-giving Immortals,” after a series of phrases with para with gen. abl. ‘before’ (para za˛θa¯t ‘before the birth’). ˜ On derivatives with the sense ‘after’ (Ved. ápara- ‘later, following’ and adv. áparam ‘hereafter’ : OP apara-) cf. §..
Germanic (*af- ambiguous!): Reflexes of *h op- ‘back, later’ may be assumed . . 1 for Go. afta ‘Ñπ σσω’ (OE œft ‘back, behind’, Go. aftana ‘from behind’, OIc. aptan), and also in OE æ¯fen, OHG aband¯ ‘evening’. PGmc. *aftara- ‘(the one) after, behind’ (OHG aftero, OE æfter, also adv., prep. after, adv. afteri), with the contrastive suffix *-tero-, is the most convincing comparandum for Lat. opiter. Cf. also the adverbs Go. aftaro ‘Ôπισθεν, Ñπ σσω’ (with aftuma ‘σχατοι’, aftumist ‘σχ£τως’) and with morpheme *-tro-, Go. aftra ‘ες τ¦ Ñπ σσω, behind’. All this makes it evident that *h op(i) is surely 1 reflected in Germanic too. On the suffixed forms cf. §.. To sum up: The evidence from Greek and Lycian (Gk. Ñπ /π , Lyc. epñ), and also from Avestan (aip¯˘ı) (both formally and semantically) as well as from Hittite, Indo- Iranian and Germanic (only semantically) strongly supports the reconstruction of PIE *h op- and *h o/epí ‘upon’ and especially ‘after, later’, different from PIE *apo (*h ep- 1 1 2 or *h ap-) ‘away, off’ (Gk. ¢πÒ/¢πÚ, Lat. ab, PIIr. *apa). The shift from ‘upon’ to 1
Texts and commentary by Hawkins (:). e
To PIIr. *ápa belong Ved. apamá- ‘last, far’ : Av. ap¯e ma-, ap ma- ‘id.’, OP apataram ‘far away’. Cf. also Y. .c at aip¯ı taiš¯ aµhait¯ı ušta¯ “Then the things will in the future be available through them” ˜ (cf. Humbach’s commentary ad loc., p. .).
I owe this reference to the kindness of Prods O. Skjærvø, who assumes that ape is from *api-i-a˘ , as if a
locative form (“alternative endings -i ∼ -i-i-a˘ , cf. apaiia ‘in the back’ for *apiia in Yt. .?”). It could also be simply an error for api (note that the epenthesis is usually omitted in ape, dative singular of ap-). Aliter de Vaan s.v. ob, who argues that it means ‘at’. The reconstruction of the original vocalism of the first syllable ex Germanico ipso is not possible. So explicitly Lloyd-Springer s.v. after: “eine nicht mehr aufzulösende Mischung von idg. *ap(o)- und *op(i) enthaltende Formen.”
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i José Luis García Ramón
local ‘back’, and temporal ‘next’, ‘later’, regardless of how it may have happened, is a recorded fact, as seen in Greek and Lycian, and a similar shift may be assumed for the other languages.
In Latin and Sabellic, reflexes of PItal. *op and *ops- seem assured, whereas evi- . dence for *opi- is not conclusive: Lat. ob reflects either *opi by apocope and perhaps proclitic voicing or *op with inherited final voicing. In any event, Lat. ob (obs) is clearly different from ab (abs) ‘from, off, away’, Osc. af °, Pael. af° (: Lat. af °), Umb. ap° (: Lat. ap° or ab°), the outcomes of PIE *apo. Semantics remain, however, a problem: the meaning(s) of Lat. ob (‘towards, in front of, in connection with, on account of’, whence ‘because of’ (with acc.)), and Osc. ‘at, beside’ with abl.) do not match those of PIE *h op(i)/*h epi, in spite of úp ( 1 1 evident formal correspondences of Lat. ob(s) and Gk. π , Ved. ápi, e.g. obd¯o (*°dhh - 1 o/e-) ‘to place something as a barrier’ : Gk. πι-τ θηµι ‘close’ : api-dha¯ ‘cover’. There are, as far as I know, no instances in which the sense ‘thereupon, later’ is unequivocally
recognizable. In any case, the inherited sense ‘upper’ is still preserved in operi¯o ‘close,
˚ ˘ ˘
cover’ (*op-uer-˘ io/e-, PIE *Huer- : Ved. var- ‘cover’, Ved. RV áp¯ı-vrtá- ‘closed’, Lith. ˘
vérti ‘thread’) beside the antonymous aperi¯o ‘open’ (*ap-uer-˘ io/e- with *h ep- ‘off’, Ved. ˚ 2 pres. ápa-vrnav- ‘open’). Cf. for instance,
Plaut. Trin. / aperi, deprome inde auri ad hanc rem quod sat est, continuo operito denuo . . . “Open, take out from there enough gold for this matter, and then cover it again immediately.”
The same sense is probably also seen in optimus, which may be the outcome of *op(i)-
tmHo-˚ *‘topmost’ (*‘most on the top’).
For *op- cf. offer¯o (: OIr. ad·pair ‘sacrifices’ < *ad-obber- < *°op-ber-); for *ops- (: Gk. Ñψ-) cf. Lat. oscen (*ops-can-) ‘song bird’ (giving omens by its cry), ostendere ‘show, reveal’ (*ops-tendo/e-). Cf. Umb. .sg.imp.II , ostendu ‘let him present’, which may reflect *ops-tendo/e- or *op-steln-o/e- (Meiser :ff. ‘fer- uste(n)tu tigstellen’). On the personal names with op-, ops- in Sabellic and Latin cf. García Ramón forthcoming b. PIE *opi is assured in OIr. oíbel(l) ‘spark’, MW ufel ‘id.’ (*opi-bhela¯), Ven. PN Opi-tergium, today’s Oderzo (Hamp :). Weiss : n. . Umb. ‘from outside’ (*ap-ek-tr¯e(d), cf. Osc. ‘extra’). Osc. , , re- apehtre ehtrad afstist aflakus aflukad main unclear (cf. Untermann , s.vv.), but allow us to recognize an allomorph af ° (: Lat. af °, as a variant of ap°). They are actually two different words, as ¢πÚ occurs in dialects (e.g. Mycenaean, Thessalian) where /-o/ remains unaltered. Gk. ¢πÚ is certainly Proto-Indo-European, cf. Ved. apupᯠ- ‘flat cake’, probably *apu-h p-ó- 2 ‘dry’ (i.e. ‘away from the water’).
Cf. also OIr. iad- (*¯ed- < *epi-dheh -) ‘cover’ (Hamp :f.). ˘ 1
Italic *opsiio- in personal onomastics (Osc. , οψιον [patron.], , [gent.] : Lat. úpsim úpsiis úpsim,˘ úpsiiúí Opsius) remains ambiguous: it may reflect the preverb *op(s) ‘back, behind’ or be a -iio- derivative of PItal. *op(e)s- (Lat. opus, PIE *h ep-s-). 3
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
The shift from ‘on, upon’ to ‘towards’ may be assumed to have begun with verbs of motion, and to ‘in front of’ with stative verbs, cf. Acc. Trag. ... ac tela ob moenia offerre imperat ‘. . . and orders to volley missiles at the ramparts’, Plaut. Mil. qui ob oculum habebat lanam . . . “the one who had a patch on his eyes.” The sense ‘because of’ may have its origin in *‘on the basis of, on account of’. Cf. Plaut. Am. nunc profecto uapula ob mendaciam “And assuredly be beaten because of your lying” (*‘on account of’), or Ep. id paratum et sese ob eam rem id ferre “that he had it [eum argentum, ] in hand and was bringing it himself for this purpose” (*‘on the basis of’).
The comparative evidence unmistakably supports the existence of IE *h op-tero- or . 1 *h opi-tero- with contrastive *-tero- with the precise sense ‘next’ (contiguity) and ‘later’, 1
or more precisely, ‘younger’. PIE *h op-,*h opi are also the basic forms for derivatives ˘ 1 1 in *-ero- as well as in *-tio-, which do not show any obvious difference of sense. Parallel formations on local and temporal adverbs with contrastive *-tero- and *-ero- are well
attested. For *-tero- cf. PIE *h en-tero- (Ved. ántara- ‘interior’, Gk. ντερα ‘entrails’, 1 ˘ Lat. inter and inter-ior, with recharacterization by -ior) beside *en-tio-h (Gk. εσω, cf. 1 Lith. ˛iscios pl. f. ‘entrails’). For *-ero- cf. Ved. ádhara- ‘inferior’ : YAv. aδara- : OHG
untaro < PIE *(H)nd˚ h-ero-, Ved. ápara- ‘posterior’ : OAv., OP apara- < PIE *h op- ˚ 1 ero-, Hitt. kattera- ‘inferior’ < *kmt-ero-. At this point, let us review the essential data for adjectives with the specific sense ‘later, last’ that formally and/or semantically support the interpretation of Lat. opiter as the outcome of *h op-tero- or * h opi-tero-: 1 1
PGmc. *aftara-(< PIE *h op-tero- ‘after’, not only ‘behind’) is the best compa- . . 1 randum for Lat. opiter. It reflects the same pattern as Ved. ápara- ‘the later one’ : Av. OP apara- (*h op-ero-), as I have tried to show elsewhere. The dossier of terms di- 1 rectly connected with the temporal sense ‘the one after’ is not very large, but fairly explicit: OHG aftero ‘the following, the one after, later’ (Weissenburger Katechis- mus niuuiht ¯eriren erdho afteren “nihil prius aut posterius”), still living on in NHG After ‘anus’, as well as OHG afterôro ‘the later, the second’, superlatives aftrôsto ‘the last one’, adv. az afterôsten ‘finally, at the end’. Cf. also the adverbs OHG after, afteri, and superlative adverb aftrôst ‘finally, at the end’ (: postremum), OE æfter, aeftresta. PGmc. *aftara- survives also in Go. aftaro (: local ‘Ñπ σσω’), but a temporal reading
García Ramón :ff. For the Germanic forms in *-ero- see Krahe . Other forms with PGmc. *eb-° (*ep°) do show clear evidence of the temporal sense ‘after’, cf. Go. ibdalja ‘κατ£βασις’, OE eofolsian ‘to blaspheme’. OHG aftero also has the pejorative reading ‘worse, minor’ (e.g. in aftrun steti “in loco inferiori”F .),
just like Hitt. apezziia˘ -. Further reflexes of *h op-tero-,*h op-tro- with temporal reading are the Gothic adverbs aftaro ‘behind’ 1 1 and aftra (: OIc. aptr) ‘backwards, back again’, which may be traced back to PGmc. *after¯o and *aftr¯o/¯e respectively (instr. *h op-teroh and *h op-troh , cf. García Ramón :, ). 1 1 1 1 Cf. L. : standandei . . . aftaro “στ©σα ... Ñπ σσω.” It also translates ‘Ôπισθεν, from the back side’ (Mt. :, L. :).
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i José Luis García Ramón
may also be assumed on the strength of aftuma ‘σχατος, the last one’ (Mk. : aþþan managai wairþand frumans aftumans, jah aftumans frumans “πολλο δ σονται πρîτοι σχατοι κα σχατοι πρîτοι”), superl. aftumist ‘id.’ (: OE æftemest). A variant with e- grade is Go. iftuma in the formula iftumin daga ‘τÍ παÚριον, on the next day’ (Mt. : et al.).
PIIr. *apara- (PIE *h op-ero- ‘the one after’) is well reflected in Vedic and . . 1 Old Persian. Ved. ápara- ‘the young one’, ‘the one after’ reflects ápi semantically, as the opposite of purva¯´ - ‘first’ (RV X .). The same applies to adverbial aparám in opposition to pura¯´ ‘before’ (RV II .), adyá ‘today’ (RV I ., II . et al.), nunám¯ ‘now’ (RV I . et al.). Cf., e.g., RV X .c yátha¯ ná purvam¯´ áparo jáhati¯ “. . . so that the younger one leaves behind the elder,” RV II .ab námah. pura¯´ te varunotá. nunám¯ utapar᯴ m. tuvijata¯ bravama¯ “Our reverence before to you, o Varuna, and now and in the future we wish to pronounce, o thou born with strength.” The same sense is recognizable in the Iranian comparanda, OP apara (e.g. DB . tuvam ka¯ xšaya¯ θiya haya aparam ahi¯ “You, whosoever shall be king hereafter . . . ”) and in the compound YAv. apara-zata-¯ ‘born later, as the second’ (Yt. . jam¯ aspahe¯ aparazatahe¯ yazaimade . . . maiδii¯oi.maµhahe¯˚ aparazatahe¯ . . . uruuatat.narahe aparaza-¯ ˜ tahe “(die Fravašay des ašagläubigen) jüngeren Jam¯ aspa,¯ . . . des jüngeren M., . . . des
jüngeren U.” (Wolff).
˘ ˘ ˘
Hitt. apezzi(ia)-˘ /apizzi(ia)-, the outcome of *h op-tio- or *h optiio-, occurs . . 1 1
as ‘the youngest (son)’ twice, cf. KBo. . obv. – (Zalpa myth) [hante]zziaš ˘ ˘
DUMU.MEŠ nikuš™(š)mušnatta ganeššer appizziiaš™a™ššan [] -uš™zan¯ekuš™šummuš ˘ × dašk¯euen[i n]u lˇešaliktumari “The first (older) sons did not recognize their sisters, but the youngest [. . . -ed?]: ‘we are taking [ ] our sisters. Do not violate/accost (them).” Cf. also KUB . i – (Hattusili III’s “autobiography/apology”: Otten, StBoT .–) “(My father Mursili begat us four children: Halpasulupi, Muwattalli, Hat-
For instance, Mk. : jabai ®as wili frumista wisan, sijai allaize aftumists . . . “ε τις θλει πρîτος εναι, σται π£ντων σχατος . . . ” also as an adverb (Mk. : aftumist habaiþ “σχ£τως χει”). Go. aftra is local-directive (“ες τ¦ Ñπ σσω,” e.g. L. : ni manna . . . sai®ands aftra, gatils ist “οÙδες . . . βλπων ς τ¦ Ñπ σω, εÙθετÒς στι”), but also temporal, rendering ‘π£λιν, δεÚτερον’ in the sense ‘again’, cf. Sk. .. ibai mag in wamba aiþeins seinaizos aftra galeiþan jah gabairaidau?“µ¾ δυναται ες τ¾ν κοιλ αν τÁς µητρÒς αØτοà δεÚτερον εσελθεν κα γεννηθÁναι;” Go. aftra matches Lat. retr¯o (with instr. *-tro-h ) semantically. 1 Directive -a is also attested in Gothic adverbs directly formed on the basic adverb, e.g. fairra ‘πÒρρω, µακρ£ν’,
faura ‘µπροσθεν, πρÒ°’ (García Ramón :). ˚ Cf. also RV II .d adya¯´ ca no m¯r.láyataparᯠm. ca “Today be ye merciful to us and in the future.”
Benveniste :ff.; Oettinger . The spellings ap-pí-iz-zi(-ia-)˘ (× ap-pí-e-iz-zi- in the Anitta Text,
× ap-pa-iz-zi) suggest that the -e- is either due to anaptyxis or is analogical with the antonym hantezziia-˘
˘ ˘ ˘ ‘first, forward, earliest, of first rank’ (Oettinger :f.). Hitt. appe/izziia-, if from *h op-tio-, formally 1 matches Ved. aptyá- (RV I .) ‘external space’ (Oettinger ). Also ‘backmost, hindmost, last, of lowest rank’, like OHG aftero (cf. n. ). The older brothers do not recognize their sisters, but the youngest warns against incest. H. Craig Melchert, whom I thank very much for comments and for the second reference cited above, suggests that the missing verb must be a verbum dicendi.
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
tusili and Massanauzzi, a daughter) nu™zahumandaš™pat¯ EGIR-zziš DUMU-aš ešun ˘ “of all these I was the youngest child.” Likewise in Vedic, the adjective ápatya-, in spite of being formally close to ápa, has in fact the sense ‘the one after, the young(est)’, which is preserved in the substantivized neuter ápatya- ‘offspring, descendants’, e.g. RV I .d tváya¯ ´surt¯ a¯´ váhaman¯ a¯ ápatyam “dispersed by you when they were bring- ing their descendants with them.” Cf. also apatya-sac-¯´ ‘accompanied by descendants’, often in the phrase rayím. apatyasacam¯´ ´srútyam rara-¯ , e.g. RV I .cd asmé
rayím. nasaty¯ a¯ brhántam˚ apatyasaca¯´ m. ´srútyam. rarath¯ am¯ “Bestow on us, Nasatyas,¯ great wealth, accompanied by descendants, and glorious.” On the other hand, Hom. Ñπ σσω ‘after, backward’, the antonym of πρÒσσω ‘before, forward’ (Il. . Ð γ¦ρ οος Óρα πρÒσσω κα Ñπ σσω “For he alone saw both before and after,” Il. .– ... µ» τις Ñπ σσω / τετρ£φθω ποτ νÁας .../ ¢λλ¦ πρÒσσω εσθε . . . “Let
none turn back to the ships . . . but press forward . . . ”), continues an instr. *opi-tio-h˘
˘ ˘ ˘ 1 from *h opi-tio-, which matches Hitt. ape/iizz(ia-), the antonym of hante/izziia- ‘first, 1 ˘ of highest rank’ (cf. hanzi, hanza). ˘ ˘ Lyc. epñn˜ene/i- ‘younger brother’, i.e. ‘after-brother’, which matches Hitt. . . EGIR-az-zi ŠEŠ-ni ‘o younger brother’, occurs in the dat. sg. epñn˜eni at TL . (Xanthos):
eb˜eñn˜e: xupã: m™˜ene prñnawat˜e: mede: epñn˜eni ehbi: hjmprãma:˜ se(j)™atli “Mede has built this tomb for his younger brother Embromos and for himself.”
The word epñn˜ene/i- is obviously a derivative of Lyc. epñ ‘afterwards’ (: Hitt. appan¯ ). The form epñ also occurs twice as the first member of a compound man’s name epñχuχah, the second example in a newly published inscription edited by M. Seyer and R. Tekoglu˘ (I: apñχuχah tideimi ‘the son of Apñχuχa’).
Other Vedic forms with ap- either reflect the local reading of *h op- or are simply related to apa- ‘far, 1 off’. This is the case for the superlative apamá- (RV X . ‘the very last one (: far away)’, cf. HLuv. apami-
‘west(ern)’), and ápañc¯ - ‘being in the rear, western’ (acc. nt. ápak¯ ), matching YAv. apaš, fem. apaši, as well ˘
as directive apaša ‘back(wards)’ (: Ved. *ápac¯ a¯ :*-nk˚ u-éh ), which occurs in opposition to prañc-¯ , e.g. RV ˚ 1 I . ápa¯n˙ pra¯´n˙ eti svadháya¯ grbh¯ıtó “Backwards, forwards he goes through his own decision, even if
retained,” RV III .c (also VIII .a = .a) raj¯´ a¯ vrtrá˚ m. janghanat˙ prag¯´ ápag¯ údag “The king might
slay the enemy in the east, in the west, in the north,” and in Young Avestan, Yt. . snaθ e m apaša apa. v x anuuainti. “They turn the blow backwards.” Cf. also RV II .cd sárvav¯ıram. . . . apatyasaca¯´ m. ´srútyam. and VI .ab tárutram apatyasaca¯´ m. ´srútyam. . García Ramón :f., . Hom. Ñπ σ(σ)ω, like πρÒσ(σ)ω), is both directive and locative (Il. . º τιν£ς φαµεν εναι ¢οσσητÁρας Ñπ σσω “. . . or do we think that there are other helpers at our backs”), two
characteristic readings of the instrumental. The same structure is also shown by εσω < *en-tio-h˘ (cf. Lith. 1 ˛iscios pl. f. ‘entrails’), as a parallel to *en-tero- (Gr. ντερα, Ved. án-tara-, Lat. inter). Cf. §. Morpurgo Davies :. Cf. Melchert :, and Neumann : with discussion of different interpretations. Seyer and Tekoglu˘ :f. As Seyer remarks (:), the “patronym is identical with the one of TL on the tomb in the Necropolis III of Limyra (TL .: st[a]maha-t[i prñ]nawate: epñχuχa
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i José Luis García Ramón
To sum up: OHG aftero ‘the one after, later’ (*-tero-), Ved. ápara- ‘the youngest’
: OP apara-, YAv. apara° (*-ero-), Hitt. appe/izz(iia)-˘ ‘the youngest (son)’ and Ved. áptya- ‘youngest’ (and secondarily ápatya- ‘offspring, descendants’), as well as the ad-
verb Hom. Ñπ σσω ‘after, later’ (all *-tio-˘ ) are derivatives of *h op-, or *h opi (at least 1 1 in the case of Hom. Ñπ σ(σ)ω). All of them save Ñπ σ(σ)ω have in common that a con- trastive derivative of ‘later’ is a designation of a young(er) person. The same applies obviously to Lyc. epñn˜ene/i- ‘younger brother’. Their meanings fit perfectly with the semantics I propose for Lat. Opiter (*op-tero- or *opi-tero-).
Let us now return to Opiter. Lat. ob, obs have the sense ‘thereupon, in addition’ . only sporadically, and the sense ‘next, later’ (posteriority) is not attested. But the very substantial amount of evidence for the meaning ‘next in time, later’ of *h op-/*h epi in 1 1 Greek, in Lycian and the other Anatolian languages, in Indo-Iranian and in Germanic strongly supports the idea that Italic *op(i)- had among its meanings the one still sur- viving in *op- or *opi- as the base form of contrastive *opi-tero-. Some instances that allow us to assume the semantics found in other languages for Italic ob, ops have been mentioned above (§). We can assume that PItal. *op(s) has lost the sense ‘later’ and that this was expressed by *posti within Italic (Lat. post with acc., also Osc. , , púst pust post, Umb. , pos(t) with abl.). pust As to the formal side of the explanation of Opiter as the outcome of PItal. *op-tero- or *opi-tero- ‘the later one’, the fact is that both forms would have regularly yielded Lat.
†opter, gen. †optr¯ı. The /i/ in the second syllable of opiter is a problem. It may be ex- plained either as the anomalous conservation of inherited˘ *opi-, which should actually have been dropped by syncope, cf. dexter from *deksi-tero-, or by re-introduction of /i/ by analogy (and through association) with °piter in Iuppiter, Diespiter. This restora- tion makes sense in the context of a folk-etymological reinterpretation of the preform of opiter as a compound with pater ‘father’ as its second member. The same reanaly- sis explains the “Entgleisung” into the third declension, as shown by genitive Opitris (instead of †opitr¯ı).
An alternative protoform *h opi-tro- (with *-tro-, not *-tero-), as kindly suggested 1 ˚ to me by Alexander Nikolaev, would yield nom. *opitros, whence *opitrs > opiter. The “Entgleisung” into the rd declension would be due again to the synchronic asso- ciation with °piter. This explanation is the simplest one phonetically, but implies a derivative -tro-formation from a Proto-Italic adverb *opi instead of *op (like Go. af- tra). Adverbs formed with the suffix *-tro- (actually instrumental forms in -tr¯o with directive function, and perlative -tra¯) are fairly frequent in Latin (contr¯o° Osc. ∼ contrud, intr¯o, retr¯o, dextr¯o, intr¯o(uo)rsum, retr¯o(uo)rsum, dextr¯o(uo)rsum), but they typically have a local (or temporal) non-inflected root adverb as their derivational
The basic case form was instr. *-troh , *-tréh -eh (García Ramón :ff.). 1 2 1 The formation is also productive with nonadverbial bases, e.g. dextr¯o([uo]rsum), sinistr¯o([uo]rsum), ali¯o([uo]rsum) created on dexter, sinister, alius.
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
base. Thus to derive Opiter from *opi-tro- would be rather unusual in terms of Latin word-formation. An inherited form *op-tero- (or opi-tero-) fits better into the pattern of Latin and Proto-Indo-European derivation and is supported by comparison, espe- cially OHG aftero. OLat. opiter, being an obsolete epithet, was replaced by a derivative of post, the non- etymological continuant of *op(i), namely posterus, posterior, and postr¯emus, postumus. The specific meaning of these innovative forms viz. ‘born after his father’s death’ is clear, cf. Var. Ling. ., Fest. p. L. Postumus cognominatur post patris mortem natus. These terms are also used as names: Posterius (cognomen), Postumus (first a praenomen, later a cognomen), Postimus. OLat. Opiter, being the not fully regular outcome of a term meaning ‘the later one’, was remade after the word for father, and retained as an isolated archaism in the onomastic lexicon.
References Ampolo, Carmine. . “Fertor Resius Rex Aequicolus.” La parola del passato :– . Bader, Françoise. . La formation des composés nominaux du latin. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Benveniste, Émile. . Hittite et indo-européen. Paris: Maisonneuve. de Vaan, Michiel. . Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Leiden: Brill. Dunkel, George. –.“ΠρÒσσω κα Ñπ σσω.” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprach- forschung :–. García Ramón, José Luis. . “Adverbios de dirección e instrumental indoeuropeo.”
In Berthold Delbrück y la sintaxis indoeuropea hoy, ed. Emilio Crespo and José Luis
García Ramón, –. Wiesbaden: Reichert. ˘ ———. . “Zur Bedeutung˘ indogermanischer Verbalwurzeln: *h nek- ‘erreichen, 2 reichen bis’, *h nek- ‘erhalten, (weg)nehmen’.” In Gering und doch von Herzen: 1 Indogermanistische Beiträge. Bernhard Forssman zum . Geburtstag, ed. Jürgen Habisreitinger, Robert Plath, and Sabine Ziegler, –. Wiesbaden: Reichert. ———. “Hethitisch nakk¯ı- und homerisch φριστος : avestisch [°]bairišta-, home- risch φρτερος,-τατος.” In Investigationes anatolicae: Gedenkschrift für Erich Neu, ed. Jörg Klinger, Elisabeth Rieken, and Christel Rüster, –. Wiesbaden: Harras- sowitz. ———. Forthcoming a. “Italische Personennamen, Sprachkontakt und Sprachver- gleich: I. Einige oskische Namen, II. Altlatein Ferter Resius rex Aequeicolus.” In
An alternative “Gelehrtenetymologie” with reanalysis as post-humati¯o (cf. humus) certainly testifies to the Ancients’ creative imagination. Cf. Serv. ad Aen. . Postumus est post humationem parentis creatus; Isid. Orig. .. Posthumus (sic) vocatur eo quod post humationem patris nascitur, id est post obitum. Cf. also Postimianus (references in Salomies :f.).
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i José Luis García Ramón
Sprachkontakt und Kulturkontakt im Alten Italien: Onomastik und Lexikon. Jahre nach Jürgen Untermanns Wörterbuch des Oskisch-Umbrischen (Arbeitstagung Köln, .–..), ed. José Luis García Ramón, Daniel Kölligan, and Paolo Poccetti. Pisa: Fabrizio Serra. ———.Forthcoming b. “Antroponymica Italica: Onomastics, lexicon, and languages in contact in Ancient Italy. Sabellic and Latin names with /Op-/ and /Ops-/.” ESF SCH Exploratory Workshop Personal Names in the Western Roman Em- pire. Cambridge, .–.., ed. Torsten Meissner.
Hamp, Eric P. . “Indo-European *(He)op-.” Münchener Studien zur Sprachwis- senschaft :–. Hawkins, John David. . Corpus of Hieroglyphic Luwian Inscriptions: Inscriptions of the Iron Age. Berlin: de Gruyter. Humbach, Helmut. . The Gath¯ as¯ of Zarathustra and Other Old Avestan Texts. Part : Introduction, Text and Translation. Part : Commentary. Heidelberg: Winter. Juret, A.-C. . Dominance et résistance dans la phonétique latine. Heidelberg: Winter. Krahe, Hans. . “Kleinere Beiträge: Zu den Adverbia vom Typus jainþr¯o und lat. extra¯.” Indogermanische Forschungen :–. Leukart, Alex. . Die frühgriechischen Nomina auf -tas¯ und -as¯ : Untersuchungen zu ihrer Herkunft und Ausbreitung. Vienna: Akademie der Wissenschaften. Lindner, Thomas. . Lateinische Komposita: Morphologische, historische und lexikali- sche Studien. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachen und Literaturen der Universität Inns- bruck. Lloyd, Albert L., and Otto Springer. –. Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Althoch- deutschen. Vol. :-a–bezzisto. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Melchert, H. Craig. . A Dictionary of the Lycian Language. Ann Arbor: Beech Stave. Mommsen, Theodor. . Römische Forschungen. Vol. . Berlin: Weidmann. Morpurgo Davies, Anna. . “Mycenaean and Greek prepositions: o-pi, e-pi etc.” In Res Mycenaeae: Akten des VII. Internationalen Mykenologischen Colloquiums in Nürn- berg vom .-. April , ed. Alfred Heubeck and Günter Neumann, –. Göt- tingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. Neumann, Günter. . Glossar des Lykischen. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Oettinger, Norbert. . “Hethitisch appezziia-˘ und vedisch aptyá-.” In Jerzy Kuryło- wicz Memorial Volume. Vol. , ed. Wojciech Smoczynski,´ –. Cracow: Universi- tas. Palmer, Robert E. A. . The Archaic Community of the Romans. Cambridge: Cam- bridge University Press. Peruzzi, Emilio. . “Ferter Resius.” Maia :–. Salomies, Olli. . Die römischen Vornamen: Studien zur römischen Namengebung. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica. Schulze, Wilhelm. . Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen. Berlin: Weidmann.
i i
i i i “GarciaRamonMNG” — // — : — page —# i i i Lat. Opiter, OHG aftero ‘later’, PIE *h op(i)-tero- ‘the one after’ 1
———. . “Ahd. suagur. ” Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung :–. Seyer, Martin, and Recai Tekoglu.˘ . “Das Felsgrab des Stamaha in Ostlykien: Ein Zeugnis für die Ostpolitik des Perikle von Limyra?” Die Sprache :–. Solmsen, Felix. . Studien zur lateinischen Lautgeschichte. Strassburg: Trübner. Untermann, Jürgen. . Wörterbuch des Oskisch-Umbrischen. Heidelberg: Winter. Weiss, Michael. . Outline of the Historical and Comparative Grammar of Latin. Ann Arbor: Beech Stave. ———. : “Two Sabellic praenomina.” In Ex Anatolia Lux: Anatolian and Indo- European Studies in Honor of H. Craig Melchert on the Occasion of His Sixty-fifth Birth- day, ed. Ronald Kim, Norbert Oettinger, Elisabeth Rieken, and Michael Weiss, –. Ann Arbor: Beech Stave.
i i
i i