Page:Morris-Jones Welsh Grammar 0334.png

334 to other persons in deponent verbs in Ir., and deponent or passive in Lat., as Lat. itur, Osc. vincter ‘vincitur’, Umbr. emantur ‘emantur’. On the im&shy;personal use of the Lat. passive see Ernout MSL. xv 273–333.

In Kelt. the ending may be taken to have been *‑re (also *‑ro?). The Brit. shorter forms of the ‑ā‑, ‑ī‑, and thematic conju&shy;gations in the pres. were *‑ā́-re, *‑ī́-re and *‑e-re re&shy;spective&shy;ly. These give the W. pres. impers. ‑awr, ‑ir and ‑er. The second survives to this day, see ix (2), and is in common collo&shy;quial use. The first was used in Early Ml. W., and the third occurs also, but was obsoles&shy;cent owing to its clashing with the subj. form. The ‑h- sometimes seen before ‑awr and ‑er is an intrusion from the subj.

Longer forms, with *‑re added to the 3rd sg. middle secondary endings would be *‑ā̆‑to‑re, *‑ī̆‑to‑re and *‑e‑to‑re. These give the W. ‑ator or ‑otor, ‑itor and ‑etor. The dental should be ‑d‑, which occurs in dygedawr 75; the ‑t- is partly due to the intrusion of subj. ‑h‑, partly a mis&shy;transcrip&shy;tion of O.W. ‑t‑, as these forms were obsolete at the dates of our MSS. Since the above was written an O.W. example has come to light in cephitor ., with one ‑t‑ as in retec ib., Ml. W. r͑edec.

(1) The reason why the Welsh pres. has always had a fut. meaning is that it contains beside the pres. the Ar. ‑e- future, generally called subjun&shy;ctive. This tense is formed by adding the thematic vowel e/o to the pres. stem. In the case of thematic stems the effect was to lengthen the thematic vowel through&shy;out. In the sg. this would make no differ&shy;ence (Gk. subj. 🇬🇷. ind. 🇬🇷; the subj. 🇬🇷 is a re‑formation; orig. *bhérēis would give *🇬🇷 in the ind.). In long-vowel stems the added thematic vowel simply converted them to thematic stems, as Gk. subj. 🇬🇷 beside ind. 🇬🇷; this intro&shy;duces no new element. The 3rd pl. fut. *‑ōnti (Gk. Dor. 🇬🇷) would have its vowel shortened § 74 iv, and so would not differ from the pres.

In the impers. the fut. form for thematic stems would be *‑ē‑re > Kelt. *‑ī‑re, beside the pres. *‑e‑re. All thematic stems therefore would have a fut. in ‑ir beside the pres. in ‑er. This shows why ‑ir became the prevail&shy;ing pres.-fut. form.

In consonantal athematic verbs the distinction between pres. and fut. is much clearer; thus the pres. stem *es- ‘be’ has fut. stem *ese‑; the former gives the Ar. pres. *és-mi, *és-(s)i, *és-ti (> Skr. ásmi, ási, ásti); the latter gives the Ar. fut. 1. *és-ō (> Lat. ero), 2. *és-ēis, 3. *es-ēit, injunc&shy;tive *es-et (> Skr. asat, Lat. erit).

The W. pres. is a mixture of pres. and fut. forms. The Kelt. fut. *ésū, *ésīs, *ésīt would give *oe for the three persons; of this a trace survives in oe‑f 50 ‘I am’. The pres. sg. 2. *ése (< Ar. *ési) and 3. inj. *eset would give *wy, whence sg. 1. wy‑f, 2. wy‑t, 3. *wy rnetath. to yw § 78 iv; in pi-eu ‘whose is?’ it is weakened to ‑eu, § 78 iii, § 192. The Ar. 3rd sg. pres. *ésti survives in W. ys, which has become imper&shy;sonal. The W. 3rd pl. ynt (for *hynt) comes from Ar. 3rd pl. pres. *s‑enti (*s- is V-grade of √es‑). The W. 1st pl. ym (Ir. ammi)