Download A Comparative Grammar of the Sanscrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, by Franz Bopp, H.H. Wilson, Edward B. Eastwick PDF

By Franz Bopp, H.H. Wilson, Edward B. Eastwick

A founding textual content of comparative philology, Franz Bopp's Vergleichende Grammatik was once initially released in components, starting in 1833, and by way of the 1870s had seemed in 3 versions in German, in addition to in English and French translations. Bopp (1791-1867), Professor of Sanskrit and comparative grammar at Berlin, got down to turn out the relationships among Indo-European languages via exact description of the grammatical positive factors of Sanskrit in comparison to these of Zend (Avestan), Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Gothic and German. This translation (1845-50) of Bopp's first variation gave English-speaking students entry to his vital findings. Translated via Edward Backhouse Eastwick (1814-1883), the multi-lingual diplomat and student, and edited via Horace Hayman Wilson (1786-1860), Professor of Sanskrit at Oxford, this paintings testifies either to Bopp's magisterial examine and to Eastwick's amazing ability in translation. This quantity covers pronouns and verbs.

Show description

Read Online or Download A Comparative Grammar of the Sanscrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Gothic, German, and Sclavonic Languages, Volume 2 PDF

Best language & grammar books

Theory and Data in Cognitive Linguistics

Cognitive linguistics has an honourable culture of paying appreciate to clearly happening language facts and there were fruitful interactions among corpus information and elements of linguistic constitution and that means. extra lately, dialect facts and sociolinguistic information assortment methods/theoretical innovations have began to generate curiosity.

The Known Unknowns of Translation Studies

After a number of paradigm adjustments or even extra turns, after fights approximately scholarly territories and methodological renewal, after intra- and interdisciplinary discussions, Translation stories keeps to provide loads of courses facing the problem of defining itself and its item, with the borderlines of either the self-discipline and the thing, with methods of interacting with comparable (sub)disciplines.

The Lexicon: An Introduction

This publication offers an creation to the examine of phrases, their major houses and the way we use them to create which means. It deals an in depth description of the organizational ideas of the lexicon, and of the kinds used to categorise a variety of lexical phenomena, together with polysemy, that means version, behaviour in composition, and the interface with pragmatics.

Additional resources for A Comparative Grammar of the Sanscrit, Zend, Greek, Latin, Lithuanian, Gothic, German, and Sclavonic Languages, Volume 2

Example text

347. With reference to the masculine nominative singular, we have, moreover, to remark the remarkable coincidence of the Greek, Gothic, and Sanscrit in retaining the case-sign, so that 6 for 6? corresponds to the Sanscrit-Gothic sa for sas. The latter appears analogous to the interrogative hvas, " w h o ? " in Gothic (§. ). In Sanscrit, however, the suppression of the case-sign is not quite universal; for before a stop we find *j: sati euphonic for sas (§. 22. and Gramm. Crit. §. 75. ); and before words beginning with a TCt so, according to a general principle of sound from sas, by melting down the s to it, and regularly contracting the a + u to 6 (§.

F. " that," if its final diphthong is combined with the u of the oblique case ^r»T amu (compare §. * The Latin obeys the same principle in the pronouns hi-c, Me, iste, ipse, which are deprived of the nominative sign, and for which we might have expected his-c (compare hun-c from hu-mc), illus, istus, and ipsus, which latter actually occurs; and in the same language the relative qui is distinguished from the more energetic interrogative quis by the absence of the nominative sign. In agreement with this principle stands also the circumstance, that in Sanscrit the masculine pronominal bases in a, in the plural nominative have not, like other words, as for their termination, but, in like manner, suppress the case suffix, and extend the a of the base to TJ e, by the admixture of a purely phonetic i; hence % it, from which the dative and ablative U-bhyas, genitive te-shdm, locative te-shu.

Ta. D. 6 NEUTER. Ac, te, 7 {te), ra, .... tye,8 The rest like the Masculine. FEMININE. Ac. U? Ab. L. (fe), (tabya), .... , tie, D. rcav, torn,3 G. rouv, G. 4 toyu. 1 2 Veda form, see §. 208. § . 221. 215. * §. , where, however, the reason for the ye, instead of the to be anticipated o, was incorrectly assigned. The truth is, obyema is founded on the Sanscrit base -g^rq ubhaya, nom. ubhayam, " both"; and with regard to the designation of the number two, we must observe, that the Lithuanian, also, forms some cases from an extended theme in ia, euphonic k ; viz.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.87 of 5 – based on 10 votes