3,277,719
edits
ἡμεῖς: Difference between revisions
From LSJ
1b
(2b) |
(1b) |
||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
{{elru | {{elru | ||
|elrutext='''ἡμεῖς:''' (pl. к [[ἐγώ]]) мы. | |elrutext='''ἡμεῖς:''' (pl. к [[ἐγώ]]) мы. | ||
}} | |||
{{etym | |||
|etymtx=Grammatical information: pron. pers.<br />Meaning: [[we]], [[us]] (Il.).<br />Other forms: acc. <b class="b3">ἡμᾶς</b>, Ion. <b class="b3">ἡμέας</b>, Dor. <b class="b3">ἁμές</b>, acc. <b class="b3">ἁμέ</b>, Aeol. <b class="b3">ἄμμες</b>, acc. <b class="b3">ἄμμε</b><br />Derivatives: Possessive <b class="b3">ἡμέ-τερος</b>, Dor. <b class="b3">ἁμέ-τερος</b>, <b class="b3">ἁμός</b>, Aeol. <b class="b3">ἀμμέ-τερος</b>, <b class="b3">ἄμμος</b> [[our]]. The acc. <b class="b3">ἁμέ</b>, <b class="b3">ἄμμε</b> go back on <b class="b3">*ἀσμε</b> (s. below) and gave through adopting nominal inflexion the nom. <b class="b3">ἁμές</b>, <b class="b3">ἄμμες</b>, then also <b class="b3">ἡμεῖς</b> (from <b class="b3">-έες</b>) with the new acc. <b class="b3">ἡμέας</b>, and with irregular contraction <b class="b3">ἡμᾶς</b>. Then came the genetives <b class="b3">ἡμῶν</b>, <b class="b3">ἡμέων</b>, <b class="b3">ἁμέων</b>, <b class="b3">ἀμμέων</b>. On the datives <b class="b3">ἡμῖν</b> etc. s. below.<br />Origin: IE [Indo-European] [35] <b class="b2">*ne\/os</b> [[we]]<br />Etymology: The archaic <b class="b3">ἁμέ</b>, <b class="b3">ἄμμε</b> < <b class="b3">*ἀσμε</b> agree exactly with Av. [[ahma]] [[us]]; in Skt. <b class="b2">asmā́n</b> <b class="b2">id.</b> it got the nominal ending. Other forms like Skt. [[nas]] (enclitic), Lat. [[nōs]], Goth. [[uns]] < IE <b class="b2">*nōs</b> resp. <b class="b2">*n̥s</b> show for <b class="b3">*ἀσμε</b> = Av. [[ahma]] IE basis with added element <b class="b2">-sme</b>: <b class="b2">*n̥sme</b> < <b class="b2">*n̥s-sme</b>. The spiritus in <b class="b3">ἁμ-</b>, <b class="b3">ἡμ-</b> could be analogical after <b class="b3">ὑμ-</b>. - The dativ <b class="b3">ἡμῖν</b>, Dor. <b class="b3">ἁμιν</b>, Aeol. <b class="b3">ἄμμι(ν</b>) from <b class="b3">*ἀσμι(ν</b>) recalls the Indo-Iranian demonstratives and interrogatives Av. [[ahmi]], <b class="b2">ásmin</b> <b class="b2">in eo</b>, Av. [[kahmi]], Skt. <b class="b2">kásmin</b> <b class="b2">in quo?</b>; cf Cret. <b class="b3">ὅτι-μι</b>, <b class="b3">μήδι-μι</b>. The long <b class="b3">-ῖν</b> is an innovation (after the longvowel endings in <b class="b3">ἡμ-ῶν</b>, <b class="b3">-εῖς</b> etc.?). - Greek like Latin and Celtic lost the specific nominative for [[we]], Goth. [[weis]], Hitt. <b class="b2">u̯ēš</b>, Skt. <b class="b2">vay-ám</b> etc. and used the acc. - Details Schwyzer 600ff. | |||
}} | }} | ||
