FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118  
119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   >>   >|  
pp and Grimm, maintaining that there could be nothing irregular in language, particularly in phonetic changes. If this means no more than that under the same circumstances the same changes will always take place, it would be of course a mere truism. The question is only whether we can ever know all the circumstances, and whether there are not some of these circumstances which cause what we are apt to call irregularities. When Bopp said that Sanskrit _d_ corresponds to a Greek [Greek: d], but often also to a Greek [Greek: th], I doubt whether this is often the case. All I say is, if _deva_ corresponds to [Greek: theos], we must try to find the reason or the circumstances which caused so unusual a correspondence. If no more is meant than that there must be a reason for all that seems irregular, no one would gainsay that, neither Bopp nor Grimm, and no one ever doubted that as a principle. But to establish these reasons is the very difficulty with which the Science of Language has to deal. There is no word that has not an etymology, only if we consider the distance of time that separates us from the historical facts we are trying to account for, we should sometimes be satisfied with probabilities and not always stipulate for absolute certainty. Many of Bopp's, Grimm's, and Pott's etymologies have had to be surrendered, and yet our suzerainty over that distant country which they conquered, over the Aryan home, remains. If there is an etymology containing something irregular, and for which no reason has as yet been found, we must wait till some better etymology can be suggested, or a reason be found for that apparent irregularity. If the etymological meaning of _duhitar_, daughter, as milkmaid, is doubted, let us have a better explanation, not a worse; but the general picture of the early family among the Aryans "somewhere in Asia" is not thereby destroyed. The father, Sk. _pitar_, remains the protector or nourisher, though the _i_ for _a_ in _pater_ and [Greek: pater] is irregular. The mother, _matar_, remains the bearer of children, though _ma_ is no longer used in that sense in any of the Aryan languages. _Pati_ is the lord, the strong one--therefore the husband; _vadhu_, the yoke-fellow, or the wife as brought home, possibly as carried off by force. _Vis_ or _vesa_ is the home, [Greek: oikos] or _vicus_, what was entered for shelter. _Svasura_, [Greek: hekyros], _Socer_, the father-in-law, is the old man of the _svas_,
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118  
119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140   141   142   143   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

circumstances

 
reason
 

irregular

 

remains

 

etymology

 

corresponds

 

doubted

 

father

 
family
 

picture


Aryans

 

destroyed

 

conquered

 

explanation

 

irregularity

 
protector
 

apparent

 

suggested

 
etymological
 

meaning


milkmaid

 

daughter

 

duhitar

 

general

 
possibly
 

carried

 

entered

 

shelter

 

Svasura

 

hekyros


brought

 

longer

 
children
 
bearer
 

mother

 

languages

 

fellow

 

husband

 

strong

 

nourisher


certainty

 
phonetic
 

caused

 

language

 

gainsay

 

unusual

 

correspondence

 

question

 
truism
 
Sanskrit