ἄφενος: Difference between revisions

|etymtx=Grammatical information: n.<br />Meaning: [[wealth]] (Il.). On the meaning Hemelrijk, [[Πενία]], diss. Utrecht 1926.<br />Other forms: m. (after [[πλοῦτος]], Fehrle Phil Woch. 46, 700f).<br />Compounds: [[εὐηφενής]] (Il.; the better attested v. l. [[εὐηγενής]] is hardly correct; Bechtel, Lex.); also in the PN <b class="b3">Δι-</b>, <b class="b3">Κλε-</b>, <b class="b3">Τιμ-αφένης</b>.<br />Derivatives: (with loss of vowel and remarkable final stress) [[ἀφνειός]] (Il.), later [[ἀφνεός]] [[rich]] (Il.). From here retrograde [[ἄφνος]] n. (Pi. Fr. 219).<br />Origin: IE [Indo-European] <b class="b2">*h₂bʰen-</b> [[rich]]<br />Etymology: Uncertain. The connection with Skt. <b class="b2">ápnas-</b> n. [[possessions]], [[riches]] (Bréal MSL 13, 382f.; cf. [[ὄμπνη]]; also Pisani Ist. Lomb. 73, 515) is now generally rejected (also as <b class="b2">*apsnos</b>). - The word was one of the corner stones of the Pelasgian theory, which can now be abandoned (also Heubeck's variant, the Minoan-Minyan language: Praegraeca 70). The agreement with Hitt. <b class="b2">happina(nt)-</b> [[rich]], is remarkable. The postulated verb <b class="b2">hap-(zi)</b> is improbable (Puhvel HED 3, 124f). The Hittite word could be IE (Szemerényi Glotta 33, 1954, 275 - 282). Puhvel's <b class="b2">h₁op-</b> is impossible (<b class="b2">h₁-</b> disappears in Hittite); but Lat. [[opulentus]] < <b class="b2">*op-en-ent-</b> is improbable: <b class="b2">-ulentus</b> is a frequent suffix in Latin, and <b class="b2">-ant</b> is very productive in Hittite so that it cannot be projected back into PIE; with it disappears the explanation of <b class="b2">-ulentus</b> (I also doubt the dissmilation [[n]] - [[nt]], with [[t]] after the second [[n]]; there are other difficulties in the theory, as the author indicated); the <b class="b2">-en-</b> has no clear function and is not found elsewhere after <b class="b2">op-</b>; thus the connection of [[opulentus]] with the Hittite word disappears. - Irene Balles (HS 110, 1997) starts from <b class="b2">*n̥-gʷʰn-o-</b>, parallel to <b class="b2">-io-</b> in Skt. <b class="b2">ághnya-</b> <b class="b2">(the valuable animal which is) not to be killed</b>. (She explains the adj., and the accent, from <b class="b2">*n̥gʷʰn-es-o-</b> > <b class="b3">ἀφνεό-</b>, with metrical lengthening in Homer). But she has to explain the full grade from analogy after [[σθένος]], which is improbable; the whole construction is not convincing. - The Greek word is rather IE (cf. archaic [[εὐηφενής]]). For Greek a root <b class="b2">*h₂bʰen-</b> is the obvious reconstruction. The accent and the form [[ἀφνεός]] may be explained following Balles: <b class="b2">*h₂bʰnes-ó-</b>, with ablaut as in [[ἄλγος]] - [[ἀλεγεινός]] (metr. lengthening in Homer is probable as <b class="b3">*ἀφνεοιο</b> is impossible in the hexameter and <b class="b3">*ἀφνεος</b>, <b class="b3">-ν</b> etc. are difficult). Thus the word seem perfectly IE. It cannot be connected with the Hittite word (reading <b class="b2">*ḫpina-</b> is doubtful). A loan from Anatolian would have <b class="b3">κ-</b>, the [[φ]] would be unclear, the s-stem, and the adjective.