Blair Collection > Celtic studies

116
Ebel's Celtic Studies.
Lith. muL-H mokc'ti (to be able, to un-
derstand, to count, pay), etc., are spe-
cially represented by O. Gaedh. cu-
maing cumuing (valet), cuinang (i^O-
testas, posse), cumacc (potens),c«wac/(<
ciimacht(a)e n. (potentia)=VV. 3. ki/-
foeth kyuoeth (potestas), 0. Gaedh.
cumaclitach (potens), comp. cumacht-
chu (potior)=W. 3. hjuoethaivc (po-
tens), V. chcjuidoc (" omnipotens").
Especially the Lithuanian tenuis
agrees in a wonderful manner with
the Celtic forms.
imnicc inenic, W. 3. mynych,^. menotigh
(frequens)=Goth. manags, Slav.
mnogu (raultus) ; 0. Gaedh. meince
(abundantia)=;Goth. manugei, N. H.G.
vienge ; mencain (penus).
nocht-chenn (nudus capite), P. noytli.
Arm. noaz = Goth. naqva\>s, O.
Norse naktr (nakinn), O.H.G. nachat;
Slav, nagu, Lith. niigus. — The Lat.
nudus is a different form ; it is want-
ing in Gr.
W. 3. printvf, V. gur priot (sponsus).
Arm. j>riet (maritus)=O.H.G.y;')'M(/(/
//■/(///, I\LH.G. vriedel (amasius), also
used for the husband) — Lith. /;/•<'-
telius, SI. prijdteli (amicus). Either
priawt is to be compared with brawt
(frater), therefore almost exactly^
O.ll.G. friudil, &c. (with Z for r),or a
participle (amatus), to which the
Welsh per. pass. W. 3. -at, -ef, -it,
-wyt, -awt), and Arm. part, {-et) ac-
curately agree ; in the latter case the
a.d^.priaiot (proprius), — from whence
also W. 2. umpriodaur (non possi-
dens), — represents the Homeric (piKoq
and N.H.G. " wertk'" (cf. yny pr'uiwt
person, in (his) proper person). It is
in any case one of the most interest-
ing agreements between the Celtic,
German, Slavonian, and Lithua-
nian.
sil (semen), W. 3. heu (serere), heivyt
(satuni est) — connects itself to a root
form, which, according to Schleicher,
is exclusively Germano - Slavonian :
Goth, saian, SI. sejati, Lith. se'ti,
sekla, se'mens.
The root rdd, no doubt general, but
in certain significations only Celtic,
Teutonic, Li tho- Slavonian (cf. Beitr.
I. 426 seq.)
snecJiti (nives) — the root is general
(fundamental form *siugh), but the
i- has only been preserved in the
northern languages: Lith. s/iegas,
Slav, sntgu, Goth, snaivs (=*s)>aigas,
*snaigvas) ; in the Gr. ayavvKftoQ
there is still a trace {==* ayacvixf^og);
in the Lat. nix nivis (==*nihvis, nigvis)
it has wholly vanished.
Jiait/i i., gen. flaffia Jiatho (imperium),
Jjit{i')thcinnacht f. (gloria, dignitas,
gradus), flnithenmas (gloria), W. 3.
gwlat (regio), pi. gwlndoed girledyd,
V. gulat (patria), P. gii-las (terra) —
fundamental form *r/iiti with the
same transposition of tlie medial to
the tenuis as in ithim (edo) — V. vu-
ludoc (dives), W. I. guktic (potens),
3. gwledic (imperans, princeps) —
Goth, valdan, SI. vladiti vlasti vladi^
(imperare), Lith. valdau valdyti,
Lett, louldit (N.H.G. walten, to
govern).
W. 3. gwerth (pretiima), gicerthawr
(pretiosus), P. giverthe (vendere),
gorthye (venerari) — Goth. vair])s,
Lith. vertas, Pruss. wcrts (the latter
was perhaps borrowed, as the Polish
wart certainly was?).
§. 6. Glossarial affinities of the Celtic and Teutonic.
The correspondences witli tlie Teutonic are most nmnerous ;
some of tlicm are no doubt the result of borrowing, Avhile
in the case of others, the relation is not clear; many, how-
ever, give no occasion for such a supposition. Compare for
instance :
WORDS AND ROOTS COMMON TO CELTIC AND TEUTONIC,
agathur (timet), aiditlii (timendus)=
Gotli. 6g, ogun.
aithirge, ithirge (poenitentia), aidrech
(poi-nitensj, taidirge i. e. do-aithirge
(niisiiricordia), P. eddrek, edrege,
poenitentia):=Goth. idreiga.
arbae orpe n.:=Goth. arJn; orpnm m.,
pi. horpamin=Goih. arUju, ronuirjte
=gnarhja; comarbus (cohered itas) ;
nomerpimm (trado me, confido), 7io-
birpaid (tradite vos, confidite), 7iac/n-
berpidsi (ne conf.), rocrbad (com-