Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T13:52:27.270Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Riemann and Goelzer's Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin - Grammaire Comparée du Grec et du Latin. Première Partie: Phonétique et Étude des Formes Grecques et Latines. ParO. Riemann et H. Goelzer. Paris, Librairie Armand Colin. 1901. Pp. 540. 20 fr.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

James Hope Moulton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Reviews
Information
The Classical Review , Volume 17 , Issue 7 , October 1903 , pp. 361 - 362
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1903

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 362 note 1 A propos of this subject I am tempted to venture a note bearing on the treatment of labiovelars in the Aeolic group, where, as is well known, labials appear generally even before clear towels. It has seemed to me that it is on this point that we must fasten in applying Prof. Ridgeway's suggestive theory. The Aeoliaus, Homer's Achaeans, show exactly the same treatment of labiovelais as do the Umbro-Samnites in Italy and the Gaulish and British branches of the Kelts : they agree in making q uC- into pC (Lat. quc-, ‘Pelasgian’ Greek τɛ-), and q uU- into ku-. This is a striking coincidence of phonology, and strongly suggests Prof. Ridgeway's theory as its true interpretation. I might add a remark on the philology of another distinguished archaeologist: even the linguists stumble at times over labiovelars, and some of Mr. A. B. Cook's brilliant combinations for the Oak can only be justified by revolutionary legislation on those tough subjects. Κερκων and qucrcus is truly seductive. But if it is a true equation Κερκων is not Greek, unless we are to force it into the κς category. And if we do, we must give up the perquus original, and with it the comparison of Hercynia, the Lith. Perkunas, and probably our fir, to say nothing of the Vedic Parjanya. I would rather sacrifice the Quirites and Cercyon.