βούλομαι: Difference between revisions

|etymtx=Grammatical information: v.<br />Meaning: [[want]], [[wish]] (Il.).<br />Dialectal forms: Arc.-Cypr. Eretr. (also Hom., s. Chantr. Gramm. hom. 1, 311) [[βόλομαι]], Lesb. [[βόλλομαι]], Dor. (Cret.) [[βώλομαι]]; Thess. [[βέλλομαι]], Boeot. [[βείλομη]], Dor. (Heracl. etc.) [[δήλομαι]], Locr. Delph. [[δείλομαι]]. - Other tempora are based on the present: [[βουλήσομαι]], [[ἐβουλήθην]], [[βεβούλημαι]]; to [[βέβουλα]] (Α 113) below.<br />Derivatives: [[βουλή]] [[will]], [[decision]], [[council]] (Il.); Dor. Arc. [[βωλά]], Lesb. [[βόλλα]]. Denomin. [[βουλεύω]] (<b class="b3">βωλ-</b>, <b class="b3">βολλ-εύω</b>), <b class="b3">-ομαι</b> [[deliberate]] (Il.), with many deriv.: [[βούλευμα]], [[βουλεία]], [[βουλευτής]], [[βουλευτήριον]] [[council-chamber]].<br />Origin: IE [Indo-European] [472?] <b class="b2">*gʷel-</b> (<b class="b2">*gʷelh₃-</b>?) [[want]], [[wish]]<br />Etymology: The verb is much discussed and there is no agreement on its history. The root must have been <b class="b2">*gʷel-\/gʷol-</b>. - There may have been a perfect with present meaning <b class="b3">*βέβολα</b>, a trace of which could be <b class="b3">προ-βέβουλα</b> (Α 113) with newly introduced [[ου]] from [[βούλομαι]]. The o-vocalism and the <b class="b3">β-</b> may have been spread from the perfect. (There may also have been influence of [[βουλή]], but this may itself have been derived from the present.) But it seems doubtful that the perfect alone is the source of all the o-vowels. - The central problem is the origin of the present. One has assumed an <b class="b2">n-</b> or an <b class="b2">s-</b>suffix; Ruijgh, Lingua 25 (1970) 315f. thinks only <b class="b3">-λν-</b> can explain the compensatory lengthening. S. Slings, Mnemosyne 28 (1975) 1-16. - Recently Peters, FS Risch 1986, 311, suggests a root in <b class="b2">-h₃</b>. This may help explain the o-vocalism. A nasal present <b class="b2">*gʷl-n-h₃-</b> would have given <b class="b3">*βαλνο-</b> [or <b class="b3">βλανο-</b>?] which was replaced by <b class="b3">*βολν-</b>. Pamphylian [[βΟλΕμενος]] would have <b class="b3">βολε-</b> < <b class="b3">*βελο-</b> < <b class="b2">*gʷelh₃-</b>. Many problems of detail remain. E.g. there is no evidence for <b class="b3">βλω-</b> and no basis for the introduction of the <b class="b2">o-</b>vocalism; in this view the e-vocalism is also problematic. - On the relation between [[βούλομαι]], [[ἐθέλω]] and [[λῆν]] s. Braun Atti R. Ist. Veneto 98, 337ff.; Rödiger Glotta 8, 1ff.; Wifstrand Eranos 40, 16ff.