Page:Morris-Jones Welsh Grammar 0281.png

§ 160 Origin of dependent pronouns: (1) Prefixed.—fy < Ar. *mene § 113 ii; dỿ ‘thy’ < Brit. *to(u) proclitic form of *tou̯e < Ar. *teu̯e;—ỿ ‘his’ < Ar. *esi̯ó: Skr. asyá; y ‘her’ < Ar. *esi̯ās: Skr. asyā́ḥ, § 75 vii (2);—an ‘our’, Bret. hon, hor, all for *anr, which (like Ir. ar n- for *anr n‑) repre&shy;sents regularly (§ 95 ii (3)) Kelt. *n̥sron < *n̥s-rōm: Goth. unsara, with suff. ‑(e)ro‑: cf. Lat. nostrum with suff. ‑t(e)ro‑;—ny before hun < *nes or *nos: Skr. naḥ acc., gen., dat.;—awch ‘your’, formed from chwi on the analogy of an: ni;—eu ‘their’, O.W. ou, Bret. ho, is probably for *w͡y un&shy;accented, and so from *eison < Ar. *eisṓm: Skr. eṣā́m ‘their’ < *eisṓm, Osc. eisun‑k; for the weakening of un&shy;accented w͡y to eu see § 78 iii;—yn, ych before numerals < *esnes, *esu̯es: Goth. izwis ‘you’ acc. < *esues;—yll is a form of an l-demon&shy;strative § 165 vi, perhaps < acc. pl. *ollōs < *óli̯o- or *olno‑: Lat. ollus.

Infixed.—Gen.—&#8239;‑m, ‑th see § ii (1); Brit. *men caused the rad. of tenues, the nas. of mediae § 107 iv, and as the latter was general&shy;ized for fy, the former was for ’m;—&#8239;‑e or ‑y is merely the prefixed y contract&shy;ed with the preceding vowel;—&#8239;‑n, ‑ch are the prefixed forms with the vowel elided;—&#8239;‑e or ‑y ‘their’, original&shy;ly only after o ‘from’ and *do ‘to’; thus oe or oy ‘from their’ < o *w͡y contract&shy;ed; similarly the rarer oe ‘to their’; ay ‘and their, with their’ is formed on the analogy of oy, instead of the orig. ac eu which also survived, as oc eu ‘from their’ was formed on the analogy of the latter, instead of orig. oy (o ‘from’ had no ‑c);—i’w ‘to his’, etc., Ml. W. yw met. for *w͡y < *do ĭ ‘to his’ contract&shy;ed after *esi̥ó ‘his’ had become *i̯, but early enough for *oi to become *w͡y, see § ii (1); the metath&shy;esis is actually attested in nuy (≡ nw͡y) > nyw, see below.

Acc. (dat.).—&#8239;‑m, ‑th < *mm‑, *tt‑ from acc. *me, *te, dat. *moi, *toi, original&shy;ly used after the neg. ny, the tense part. ry, etc., which caused gemi&shy;nation of the initial; in Ir. also the forms after nī, ro, no, do, etc., are ‑mm‑, ‑t- (≡ tt); see § 217 iv (1); after the rel. a which causes lenition, ‑m, ‑th must be ana&shy;logical; the rad. initial after ‑m is due to the analogy of ‑m gen.;—&#8239;‑n (Ir. ‑nn‑) < *nes, see § (1); ‑ch by analogy; the syllabic forms prob. developed thus: *pann m cl- > *pann m̥ cl- > pan ym clywai; so n > n̥ > ỿn; ỿth, ỿch by anal.; cf. heb ỿr § 198 iii; on the whole this is more probable than that ỿ- repre&shy;sents the vocalic ending of pann lost elsewhere, which is the expla&shy;nation of the cor&shy;respond&shy;ing Ir. forms generally assumed (Thurney&shy;sen Gr. 246, Pedersen Gr. ii 145); in any case the y- is not the rel. y, which is not used after pan § 222 xi (2), so that the form pan y’m is mis&shy;leading and wrong;—&#8239;‑e, ‑y, in ae, ay ‘who&#8203;…&#8203;him’, for ai *ĭ contract&shy;ed; syllabic y < *ĭ; *ĭ < *en < *em ‘him’; the nasal ending caused the rad. of tenues, which was general&shy;ized; ‑s from the fem. acc. *sīm ‘her’, *si̯ās ‘them’, with the initial doubled as in *mm‑, *tt‑, so that it gives ‑s (not *h‑); in Ir. ‑s- is f. sg. only; in Corn. it is f. sg. and pl.; in W. extended to the m. because the m. *ĭ was lost after ni; thus *ni caf ef became nis caf ef on the anal. of nis caf hi; so ae ‘who&#8203;…&#8203;her’