CHAPTER XI

ADJECTIVES

The Declension of Adjectives.

§ 223. In the parent Indg. language nouns and adjectives were declined alike without any distinction in endings, as in Latin, Greek, and Sanskrit. What is called the uninflected form of adjectives in the Germanic languages is a remnant of the time when nouns and adjectives were declined alike. But already in Indo-Germanic the pronominal adjectives had partly nominal and partly pronominal endings as in Sanskrit. In prim. Germanic the 104 endings of the pronominal adjectives were extended to all adjectives. These remarks apply to what is called in the Germanic languages the strong declension of adjectives.

The so-called weak declension of adjectives is a special Germanic formation by means of the suffixes -en-, -on-, which were originally used to form nomina agentis, and attributive nouns, as Lat. edō (gen. edōnis), glutton, Goth. staua, judge, wardja, guard, watchman, gen. stauins, wardjins; Lat. adjectives catus, sly, cunning, rūfus, red, red-haired, silus, pug-nosed, beside the proper names Catō (gen. Catōnis), lit. the sly one, Rufō, the red-haired man, Silō, the pug-nosed man; and similarly in Gothic blinds, blind, liuts, hypocritical, deceitful, weihs, holy, beside blinda, blind man, liuta, hypocrite, weiha, priest, lit. holy one. Such nouns came to be used attributively at an early period, and then later as adjectives. And already in prim. Germanic this weak declension became the rule when the adjective followed the definite article, as ahma sa weiha, lit. ghost the holy one; OE. Wulfmǣr se geonga, Wulfmǣr the Young, OHG. Ludowīg ther snello, Ludwig the Brave, cp. NHG. Karl der Grosse. At a later period, but still in prim. Germanic, the two kinds of adjectives—strong and weak—became differentiated in use. When the one and when the other form was used in Gothic is a question of syntax (§ 430). It should be noted that there were also adjectival n-stems in the parent Indg. language, but that they did not have vocalic stems beside them as is the case in the Germanic languages.

§ 224. In Gothic the adjectives are declined as strong or weak (§ 430). They have three genders and the same cases as nouns.

A. The Strong Declension.

§ 225. The strong declension contains a-stems, i-stems, and u-stems. The case endings are partly nominal and 105partly pronominal, the latter are printed in italics. The nominal endings have already been explained in the vocalic declension of nouns. The pronominal endings will be explained in § 265.

a-stems

§ 226. The a-stems are sub-divided into pure a-stems, ja-stems, and wa-stems. The nominal endings of the pure a-stems for the three genders are the same as those of dags (§ 179), waúrd (§ 181), giba (§ 191).

Pure a-stems

§ 227. Like blinds are declined by far the greater majority of Gothic adjectives. Examples are áiweins, eternal; aírþeins, earthly; alls, all; arms, poor; áudags, blessed; baírhts, bright; báitrs, bitter; barnisks, childish; diups, deep; dumbs, dumb; dwals, foolish; fagrs, beautiful; frōþs (gen. frōdis), wise; fulgins, hidden; fulls, full; galeiks, like; gáurs, sad; gōþs (gen. gōdis), good; grēdags, hungry; gulþeins, golden; háils, whole; halts, lame; handugs, wise; hlūtrs, pure; hulþs, gracious; ibns, even; 106 juggs, young; kalds, cold; laggs, long; lats, slothful; leitils, little; liufs (gen. liubis), dear; mahts, possible; mahteigs, mighty; manags, much; mikils, great; mōdags, angry; raíhts, right; saþs (gen. sadis), full; sineigs, old; siuks, sick; smals, small; snutrs, wise; swarts, black; swērs, honoured; swinþs, strong; tils, fit; ubils, evil; unweis, unlearned; waírps, worthy; weihs, holy.

ja-stems

§ 228. The ja-stems are divided into two classes like the corresponding declension of nouns (§ 183): (1) ja-stems with a short radical syllable, and those whose stems end in a vowel; (2) ja-stems with a long stem-syllable. The latter only differ from the former in the singular. The nominal endings of (1) are the same as those of harjis (§ 184), kuni (§ 186), giba (§ 191); and of (2) haírdeis (§ 184), kuni (§ 186), bandi (§ 193).

§ 229. Like midjis are declined aljis, other; gawiljis, willing; sunjis, true; unsibjis, lawless; fullatōjis, perfect; niujis, new; ubiltōjis, evil-doing. Frija-, free, has in the nom. sing. masc. freis (§ 153).

§ 230.

§ 231. Like wilþeis are declined aírzeis, astray; alþeis, old; faírneis, old; wōþeis, sweet.

wa-stems

§ 232. The wa-stems are declined like the pure a-stems. Only a very few adjectives of this class are extant in Gothic: triggws, true; lasiws, weak, the regular form of which would be *lasius (§ 150), occurs once only, and that in the nom. sing. masc. The nom. singular forms *qius, alive, pl. qiwái; *fáus, little, pl. fawái; *usskáus, vigilant, pl. usskawái, do not occur. See §§ 149, 150.

i-stems

§ 233. With the exception of the nom. sing. all genders, the acc. sing. neut., and the gen. sing. masc. and neut., all the forms went over into the ja-declension with the same endings as midjis (§ 228). Nom. sing. hráins like gasts (§ 196), ansts (§ 198); gen. sing. hráinis like gastis; nom. acc. sing. neut. hráin from prim. Germ. *χraini, cp. OE. bryce (neut.) from *bruki, brittle; Gr. ἴδρι, skilful. The gen. sing. fem. of an adjective of this class is not extant; nor is the -ata form of the nom. acc. sing. neuter.

§ 234. Like hráins are declined analáugns, hidden; anasiuns, visible; andanēms, pleasant; áuþs, desert; brūks, useful; gafáurs, well-behaved; gamáins, common; sēls, kind; skáuns, beautiful; skeirs, clear; suts (? sūts), sweet; and a few others.

u-stems

§ 235. The u-forms appear only in the nom. sing. of all genders and in the acc. sing. neut. and are like sunus (§ 202), faíhu (§ 205). The gen. and dat. sing. of all genders are wanting. The ending of the gen. sing. masc. and neut. would probably be -áus; cp. the adverbial gen. filáus (§ 205 note). The nom. acc. neut. pl. are also wanting. All the other extant cases have passed over into the ja-declension.

§ 236. Like hardus are declined the following adjectives:— aggwus, narrow; aglus, difficult; hnasqus, soft; kaúrus, heavy; láushandus, empty-handed; manwus, ready; qaírrus, gentle; seiþus, late; tulgus, steadfast; twalibwintrus, twelve years old; þaúrsus, withered; þlaqus, soft.

B. Weak Declension.

§ 237. The weak declension of adjectives agrees exactly with that of the three nouns hana (§ 207), haírtō (§ 213), and tuggō (§ 210).

§ 238. In the same manner are declined the weak forms of the ja-stems. See § 153 note. The i- and u-stems are also thus declined, but have the endings -ja, -jō, -jō in the nom. sing. like the ja-stems, thus:—

ja-stems.

i-stems.

u-stems.

C. Declension of Participles.

§ 239. In the parent language the stem of the present participle ended in -nt, as in Lat. ferent-, Gr. φέροντ-, bearing. The masc. and neut. were originally declined like consonant stems (§ 217), and the fem. like bandi (§ 193). This original distinction was not preserved either in Gothic or the West Germanic languages. In Gothic the present participle came to have only weak forms except in the masc. nom. sing. nimands (§ 217) beside nimanda. 111 In other respects it is always declined weak like the three nouns hana (§ 207), haírtō (§ 213), managei (§ 210). The reason why the fem. is declined like managei and not like tuggō is owing to the fact that the original ending of the nom. was -ī (§§ 193, 210). In the West Germanic languages the masc. and neut. went over into the ja-declension after the analogy of the feminine, and then the pres. participle came to be declined like an ordinary adjective according to both the strong and the weak declension.

§ 240. The past participle has both the strong and the weak declension. In the former case it is declined like blinds (§ 226), and in the latter like blinda (§ 237).

Strong.

§ 241.

In the same manner are declined the past participles of weak verbs, as nasiþs, saved, acc. nasidana; salbōþs, anointed, acc. salbōdana, &c. On the interchange of þ and d see § 173.

Weak.

§ 242.

D. The Comparison of Adjectives.

1. The Comparative Degree.

§ 243. The Indg. parent language had several suffixes by means of which the comparative degree was formed. But in the individual branches of the parent language one of the suffixes generally became more productive than the rest, and in the course of time came to be the principal one from which the comparative was formed, the other suffixes only being preserved in isolated forms. The only Indg. comparative suffix which remained productive in the Germanic languages is -is-, which became -iz- (=Goth. -iz-, OHG. -ir-, OE. -r-) in prim. Germanic by Verner’s law (§ 136). To this suffix was added in prim. Germanic, or probably in the pre-Germanic period, the formative suffix -en-, -on-, as in Gr. ἡδίων from *σϝᾱδίσων, gen. ἡδίονος = Goth. sū̌tiza, gen. sū̌tizins, OHG. suoȥiro, gen. suoȥ-iren, OE. swētra, sweeter, gen. swētran. This explains why the comparative is declined weak in the oldest periods of the Germanic languages. In Gothic it is declined like the present participle (§ 239), except that the nom. sing. masc. is always weak. Beside the suffix -iz- there was also in prim. Germanic a suffix -ōz- (Goth. -ōz-, OHG. -ōr-, OE. -r-) which did not exist in Indo-Germanic. This suffix is a special Germanic new formation, and arose from the comparative of adverbs whose positive originally ended in 113-ō̃ = Indg. ablative ending -ō̃d (§ 89). And then at a later period it became extended to adjectives. In Gothic the ja-stems, i-stems, and u-stems take the suffix -iz-; pure a-stems sometimes take the one, sometimes the other suffix, thus:—

2. The Superlative Degree.

§ 244. The superlative, like the comparative degree, was formed in the Indg. parent language by means of several suffixes. But in the individual branches of the parent language one of the suffixes generally became more productive than the rest, and in the course of time came to be the principal one from which the superlative degree was formed, the other suffixes only being preserved in isolated forms. The only superlative suffix which remained productive in the Germanic languages is -to- in the combination -isto-, formed by adding the original superlative suffix -to- to the comparative suffix -is-, as in Sanskrit and Greek, as Gr. ἥδιστος = Goth. sū̌tists, OHG. suoȥisto, OE. swētest(a), sweetest. The simple superlative suffix -to- has been preserved in Gr., Lat., and the Germanic languages in the formation of the ordinal numerals, as Gr. ἕκτος, Lat. sextus, Goth. saíhsta, OHG. sehsto, OE. siexta, sixth. The Germanic suffix -ōst- was a new formation like -ōz- in the comparative. In Gothic the rule seems to have been that adjectives which had -iz- in the comparative had -ist- in the superlative, and those 114which had -ōz- in the comparative had -ōst- in the superlative; but there are not sufficient examples of the comparative and superlative of the same adjective extant to enable us to establish the rule with certainty. The superlative has both the strong and weak declension. In the former case it is declined like blinds (§ 226), except that the neut. nom. acc. sing. in -ata does not occur, and perhaps was not in use; and in the latter case like blinda (§ 237). Examples of the superlative are armōsts, poorest; háuhists, highest; managists, greatest.

3. Irregular Comparison

§ 245. The following adjectives form their comparative and superlative from a different root or stem than the positive:—

§ 246. There are six superlative forms ending in -ma, -tuma, -duma which were formed from adverbial stems with the Germanic superlative suffixes -um-, -tum-, -đum-, cp. Lat. optimus, best; intimus from *entemos, inmost = Indg. *en-tmos with vocalic m (§ 53). On the -t- beside đ see §§ 128 note 2, 136. The forms are: aúhuma, higher; fruma, the former, prior, first; innuma, the inner, innermost; aftuma, the following, next, posterus; iftuma, the following, next; hleiduma, the left, which are all declined weak like hana (§ 207), haírtō (§ 213), managei (§ 210). These came to have a comparative meaning in Gothic, 115and then to aúhuma, aftuma, and fruma new superlatives aúhumists (aúhmists), highest; aftumists, last, aftermost, frumists, first, were formed; and similarly hindumists, hindmost, spēdumists, last, from *hinduma, *spēduma.

Numerals.

1. Cardinals.

§ 247. The extant cardinal numerals are:— áins, one; twái, two; þrija (neut.), three; fidwōr, four; fimf, five; saíhs, six; sibun, seven; ahtáu, eight; niun, nine; taíhun, ten; *áinlif (but dat. áinlibim), eleven; twalif (dat. twalibim), twelve; fidwōrtaíhun, fourteen; fimftaíhun, fifteen; twái tigjus, twenty; *þreis tigjus (but acc. þrins tiguns), thirty; fidwōr tigjus, forty; fimf tigjus, fifty; saíhs tigjus, sixty; sibuntēhund, seventy; ahtáutēhund, eighty; niuntēhund (gen. niuntēhundis), ninety; taíhuntēhund (taíhuntaíhund), hundred; twa hunda, two hundred; þrija hunda, three hundred; fimf hunda, five hundred; niun hunda, nine hundred; þūsundi, thousand; twōs þūsndjōs, two thousand; ·g· (= *þreis, see § 2) þūsundjōs, three thousand; fidwōr þūsundjōs, four thousand; fimf þūsundjōs, five thousand; and the datives miþ taíhun þūsundjōm, with ten thousand; miþ twáim tigum þūsundjō, with twenty thousand. See § 2.

The final -n in sibun, niun, taíhun = prim. Germ. *sebun, older -um, *newun (Indg. *newn with vocalic n), *tehun, older -um (§ 87), was either due to the inflected forms (§ 252) or else to the influence of the ordinals (§ 253) as in OS. and OHG. *áinlif and twalif originally meant something like (ten and) one left over, (ten and) two left over, cp. Lithuanian vënů́lika, eleven, dvýlika, twelve, &c., where Goth. -lif and Lith. -lika are from *liq-, the weak form of the Indg. root leiq-, to leave, and are ultimately related to Goth. leiƕan, to lend, Gr. λείπω, Lat. linquō, I leave. The 116assimilation of *-lih to -lif first took place in twalif because of the preceding labial (§ 134 note), and then, at a later period, the -lif was extended to *áinlif (cp. dat. áinlibim) for older *áinlih. 13 to 19 were formed by the simple ordinals plus taíhun, but of these only fidwōrtaíhun and fimftaíhun are extant.

The decades 20 to 60 were formed in prim. Germanic from the units 2 to 6 and the abstract noun *teȝunđʹ- = Indg. *dekmtʹ-, decade, whence the Goth. stem-form tigu- which went over into the u-declension with a plural tigjus, as nom. twái tigjus, twenty, dat. twáim tigum. Prim. Germanic *teȝunđʹ- is a derivative of prim. Germanic *teχun- (= Indg. *dékm, Gr. δέκα, Lat. decem, Goth. taíhun) with change of χ to ȝ by Verner’s law (§ 136) and the loss of the final consonants (§ 87). These numerals govern the gen. case. The existing acc. gen. dat. forms are:— acc. þrins tiguns, fidwōr tiguns, fimf tignus; gen. þrijē tigiwē; dat. twáim tigum, saíhs tigum. The formation of the numerals 70–100 is difficult to explain; for an account of the various explanations hitherto proposed, see Osthoff-Brugmann’s Morphologische Untersuchungen, v. pp. 11–17. The numerals 200, 300, 500, 900 are formed from the units and the neut. noun hund (= Gr. ἑ-κατόν, Lat. centum), hundred, which is declined like waúrd (§ 181). They govern the gen. case. The only existing inflected forms of the oblique cases are: dat. twáim hundam, fimf hundam; þūsundi is a fem. noun, declined like bandi (§ 193), and governs the gen. case. The examples of the oblique cases are: dat. fidwōr þūsundjōm, fimf þūsundjōm, and those given on p. 115.

§ 248. The first three cardinal numerals are declinable in all cases and genders.

§ 249. (1) áins, neut. áin, áinata, fem. áina, is always strong and is declined like blinds (§ 226). Plural forms meaning only, alone also occur.

§ 250. (2)

§ 251. (3)

§ 252. The cardinal numerals 4–15 usually remain uninflected; when inflected they follow the i-declension (§ 196), forming their dat. in -im and gen. in -ē; the existing examples are dat. fid wōrim, taíhunim, áiniibim, twalibim, fimf taíhunim; gen. niunē, twalibē.

2. Ordinals.

§ 253. The extant ordinals are:— fruma (frumists, § 246), first; anþar, second; þridja, third; fimfta-, fifth; saíhsta, sixth; ahtuda, eighth; niunda, ninth; taíhunda, tenth; fimftataíhunda, fifteenth (dat. fimftataíhundin).

þridja (Gr. τρίτος) with weak stem-form from Indg. *tri-, the weak form of *trei-, three. From þridja onwards the other ordinals were formed from the cardinals by means of the Indg. superlative suffix -to- (§ 244), the t of which regularly remained unshifted in fimfta- and saíhsta (§ 128 note 2). In other positions the t became þ by the first sound-shifting (§ 128), then þ became đ by Verner’s law (§ 136), which regularly became d after n (see §§ 172–3). It is difficult to account for the -u- in ahtuda.

§ 254. fruma follows the weak declension, the fem. of which is declined like managei (§ 210). anþar is declined strong like blinds (§ 226), except that the nom. acc. neut. never ends in -ata; nom. masc. anþar (§ 175), neut. anþar, 118fem. anþara. The remaining ordinals are declined weak like blinda (§ 237).

3. Other Numerals.

§ 255. Both is expressed by masc. nom. bái, acc. bans, dat. báim, neut. nom. acc. ba; also by masc. nom. bajōþs, dat. bajōþum.

§ 256. The only extant simple distributive numeral is tweihnái, two each, of which the fem. acc. tweihnōs, dat. tweihnáim, occur. Distributive numerals are expressed by prepositional or pronominal phrases: bi twans aíþþáu máist þrins, by twos or at most by threes; ana ƕarjanōh (§ 275) fimftiguns, by fifties in each (company); insandida ins twans ƕanzuh (§ 275), he sent them forth two and two.

§ 257. Multiplicatives are formed by adding the adj. falþ- to the cardinals. They are áinfalþs, onefold, simple; fidurfalþs, fourfold; taíhuntaíhundfalþs, hundredfold; managfalþs, manifold.

§ 258. Numeral adverbs in answer to the question, how often? are expressed by numerals together with the dat. sing. and pl. of *sinþs, time (lit. a going): áinamma sinþa, once; anþaramma sinþa, a second time; twáim sinþam, twice; þrim sinþam, thrice; fimf sinþam, five times; sibun sinþam, seven times; cp. OE. ǣene sīða, once; fīf sīðum, five times.