has twofold prosodic value: in passage (I) it equals 
but in the others 
Alc, Pind. 
i.e. 
Lejeune, 
thus following a lead given by Hesychius 
This is indeed the only suggestion advanced in the respective etymological dictionaries of Boisacq, Hofmann, and Frisk, and by Seiler (
as probably metrical. I shall return below to this question.
(Ventris–Chadwick, etc.) or 
Palmer). But even here the truth is tantalizingly fugitive, since the base of both 
and 
and the aspirate is not original, although regularly appearing in these derived forms. So for 
Lejeune suggests the possibility of a Mycenaean form in 
opposed to the Classical 
However, the point in doubt for Mycenaean is purely concerned with psilosis, with the question of the form of prefix before stems which originally had h. There is no sure example quoted from it of h- before a vowel in stems which never had h: the single case of a-e-ti-to 
is insecure evidence, as Lejeune grants. To this extent, therefore, there is agreement with Homer, and that is what is relevant to the present discussion.
(see above), 
‘insatiable’ 
and ouwo? 
supno-, weak grade of *sueopno-.
is not certain. Hofmann, Et. Wb., connects with Skt. yabhati, so giving 
as the source of Greek h.
(as in that of 
) to speak of an active or passive force, since the word means ‘devoid of hurt’. This disagrees with his own note on v. 238 (discussing 
), where he grant! that of course active and passive force are common in verbal adjectives in 
and quotes 
as one such, taking v. 1211 as showing the passive sense (vol. ii, p. 137, fn. 1). The confusion arises from doubt whether 
is nominally derived (possessive compound) or verbally: it may be either. The further question arises, whether the distinction is worth retaining, that we should speak of active and passive force only for adjectives of verbal derivation. For this presupposes that active or passive sense is formally expressed if we have a verbal adjective in 
yet that is not the case. The formation is ai adjective, not a participle integrated in thi conjugational system; what is expressed i no more than association with the idea contained in the verb (see 
where the original nour describes an action or the product of an action, it seems proper to establish the sam categories of meaning lexically as for a verba derivative. So 
and 
may be described in parallel: botfi have (a), activ sense, ‘not speaking’ (which meaning is shared by English ‘speechless’); (b) passive sense, ‘not to be spoken (of)’. In short active and passive are here categories established by the lexicographer for our convenience of understanding: they are logically not formally based.
aš(š) ‘drink one's fill’.
directly from *ṇ-sã-tos, with the verb stem showing zero plus normal grades.
in other forms of the verb, see 
. as nominal, is puzzled that a verbal 
was not used instead.
from nouns as post-Homeric.
(2) 
(3) 
(not equivalent to (2): it is used at the start of the line, with caesura after 
); (4) Theog. 805 
In the Hymns two of these are duplicated: (5) H. Herm. 519 
(= (4)); (6) H. Dem. 259 
(= (I)).
by Risch (Lex. frühgriech. Epos): he lists the many explanations offered in antiquity, but finds none very satisfying. Of these he prefers connexion with 
(cf. II. 21. 386 
), as does 
the sense of the verb is ‘waver’ (in doubt and fear): this is not a very promising parallel for 
(Il. 18. 410 
of Hephaestus) does not fit into the picture as a compound of 
either for form (because of -ι-) or sense. It is attractive to follow the suggestion of 
Crossref Citations
This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by Crossref.
Olcott, Marianina
1993.
‘AÁTO∑ atOdyssey22.5: Greek and Indo-European oaths.
<i>WORD</i>,
Vol. 44,
Issue. 1,
p.
77.
Meccariello, Chiara
2017.
AN EMENDATION IN APOLLONIUS SOPHISTA'S LEXICON HOMERICUM.
The Classical Quarterly,
Vol. 67,
Issue. 1,
p.
332.