4. Nouns

4.1.1. Declension is made by adding terminations to different stem endings, vowel or consonant. The various phonetic changes in the language have given rise to the different declensions. Most of the case-endings, as shown in this Modern Indo-European grammar, contain also the final letter of the stem.

Adjectives are generally declined like nouns, and are etymologically to be classed with them, but they have some peculiarities of inflection which will be later explained.

4.1.2. Nouns and adjectives are inflected in four regular Declensions, distinguished by their final phonemes – characteristic of the Stem –, and by the opposition of different forms in irregular nouns. They are numbered following Graeco-Latin tradition: First or a-Declension, Second or o-Declension, Third or i/u-Declension, fourth or Consonant Declension, and the variable nouns.

NOTE. The Second or o-Declension is also the Thematic Declension, opposed to the rest – and probably older in the evolution of PIE nominal inflection –, which form together the Athematic Declension.

The Stem of a noun may be found, if a consonant stem, by omitting the case-ending; if a vowel stem, by substituting for the case-ending the characteristic vowel.

NOTE. Most Indo-Europeanists tend to distinguish at least two major types of declension, Thematic and Athematic. Thematic nominal stems are formed with a suffix -o- (in vocative -e), and the stem does not undergo ablaut. The Athematic stems are more archaic, and they are classified further by their ablaut behaviour: acro-dynamic, protero-dynamic, hystero-dynamic and holo-dynamic, after the positioning of the early PIE accent (dynamis) in the paradigm.

4.1.3. The following are General Rules of Declension:

a. The Nominative singular for animates ends in -s when the stem endings are i, u, ī, ū, Diphthong, Occlusive and Thematic (-os), or -Ø in ā, a, Sonant and s; while in the plural -es is general, -s for those in ā, and -os for the Thematic ones.

b. The Accusative singular of all masculines and feminines ends in -m; the Accusative plural in -ms.

c. The Vocative singular for animates is always -Ø, and in the plural it is identical to the Nominative.

d. The Genitive singular is common to animates and inanimates, it is formed with -s: -s, -es, -os. A very old alternative possibility is extended -os-(i)o. The Genitive plural is formed in -ōm (also -ēm), and in -ām in a-stems.

e. The Obliques singular end usually in -i: it can be -i, -ei, -ēi, -oi, -ōi or -āi. In the plural, there are two series of declensions, with -bh- (general) and -m- (only Gmc. and Sla.), generally -bhi, -bhis, -bhios, -bhos, and (Gmc., Bal.-Sla.) -mis, -mos, and also some forms in -si (plural mark -s- plus oblique mark -i), found mainly in Graeco-Aryan dialects.

f.  Inanimates have a syncretic form for Nom.-Ac.-Voc. in -Ø in Athematic, or -m in Thematic. The plural forms end in -a or -ā.

g. All Animates have the same form in the plural for Nom.-Voc., in -es.

4.1.4. The so-called Oblique cases – opposed to the Straight ones, Nom.-Acc.-Voc –, are Genitive and the Obliques, i.e. Dative, Locative, Instrumental and Ablative. However, the Ablative seems to have never been independent, but for thematic stems in some dialectal areas. The other three cases were usually just one local case in different contexts (what we call the Oblique), although Late PIE clearly shows an irregular Oblique declension system.

NOTE 1. There are some traces – in the Indo-European proto-languages which show divided Oblique cases – that could indicate a possible first division – from a hypothetical  five-case-IE II– between a Dat. and a Loc.-Ins., and then another, more recent between Loc. and Ins (see Adrados). Languages like Sanskrit or Avestan show 8 cases, while some Italic dialects show up to 8 (cf. Osc. Loc. aasai ‘in ārā’, or Ins. cadeis amnud, ‘inimicitiae causae’, preiuatud ‘prīuātō’, etc.), while Latin shows six and a semisystematic Locative notion; Slavic and Baltic dialects show seven, Mycenaean Greek shows at least six cases, while Koiné Greek shows five, just as Germanic dialects.

NOTE 2. We know that the splitting and merging processes that affected the Obliques didn't happen uniformly among the different stems, and it didn't happen at the same time in plural and singular. Therefore, there was neither a homogene and definite declension system in IE III, nor in the dialects and languages that followed. From language to language, from stem to stem, differences over the number of cases and its formation developed. Firstly syncretism obscured the cases, and thereafter the entire system collapsed: after the time when cases broke up in others, as in most modern Slavic languages, another time came when all cases merged or were completely lost: so today in Romance languages, in Germanic like English, or in Slavic like Bulgarian. However, Modern Indo-European needs to systematize to some extent this diversity, based on the obvious underlying old system, which usually results in 6-case paradigms (normally with Dat.-Abl. and Loc.-Ins.) in most inflected forms.

 

Nominal Desinences (Summary)

 

1. They are usually Animate nouns and end in ā, and ia/ī/iā, and also rarely in ē, ō.  Those in ā are very common, generally feminine in nouns and always in adjectives. Those in ia/ī/iā are always feminine and are also used to make feminines in the adjectival Motion. Those in ō and ē are feminine only in lesser used words. Those in a are etymologically identical to the Neuter plural in Nom.-Acc.-Voc.

a-Declension Paradigm

MIE First Declension corresponds loosely to the Latin First Declension (cf. Lat. rosa, rosae, or puella, puellae), and to the Ancient Greek Alpha Declension (cf. Gk. χώρᾱ, χώρᾱς, or τῑμή, τῑμῆς).

NOTE. The entire stem could have been reduced to IE a, because this is the origin of the whole stem system before IE III, with an original ending *-(e)h₂.

3. It is therefore identical to those nouns in r, n, s of the Fourth Declension, but for some details in vocalism: the Gen. has an -s and not -es/-os; the difference between Nom. and Voc. is that of -ā and -a. The zero-grade of the Nom.-Acc.-Voc. in ia/ī stems is different from the Gen. in -iā.

1. Nominative Singular in -Ø; as, ékwā73, mare, sénā79, old.

Example of ia/ī stems are pótni/pótnī44, lady, wĺqi/wĺqī, she-wolf, djéwi/djéwī, goddess (maybe also Lat. gallī in the later extended gallīna, rēgī in regīna, etc.), as well as Pres.Part. feminines, as príjonti/príjontī, “who loves”, friend, wésnti/wésntī, “who drives”, driver, etc.

Those in ē, ō, which aren't found very often, can present an -s as well; as in Latin bhídhēs (Lat. fides, but also O.Lat. fidis), trust, spékiēs, species, etc.

Nouns in ā can also rarely present forms in a; as in Gk. Lesb. Dika.

2. Accusative Singular in -m; as, ékwām, pótnim/pótnīm, bhídhēm.

3. Vocative Singular in -Ø. It is normally identical to the Nominative, but disambiguation could happen with distinct vowel grades, i.e. Nom. in -ā, Voc. in -a.

4. Genitive Singular in -s; as, ékwās, sénās.

The theme in ia/ī/iā produces a Genitive Singular in -ās; as, pótniās.

5. Dative-Ablative Singular in -āi, probably from an original Dat. -ei ending.

There is also a form -ei for themes in ē and in iā.

6. Locative in -āi, Instrumental in -ā, -ā-bhi, -ā-mi.

 

1. The following table presents the plural paradigm of the a-Declension.

2. The Nominative-Vocative Plural in -s: ékwās, néwās, cowijs.

This form could obviously be confused with the Genitive Singular. In equivocal contexts we change preferably the accent (ekws, ekwms, ekwm).

3. The Accusative Plural in -ms: ékwāms, néwāms.

4. The Genitive Plural in -m: ékwām, newm.

5. The Dative and Ablative Plural in -bhos, -bhios (dial. -mos); as, ékwābh(i)os, ékwāmos.

6. The Locative Plural in -su (also -si, -se); as, ékwāsi, ékwāsu.

6. The Instrumental Plural in -bhis (dial. -mis); as, ékwābhis, ékwāmis.

The Obliques have also special forms Gk. -āisi, -ais, Lat. -ais; as, Lat. rosis<*rosais.

 

 

 

1.  The Stem of nouns of the Second Declension ends in e/o, and they are usually called Thematic. They can be animates and inanimates, as well as adjectives. The inanimates have an ending -m only in Nom.-Acc.-Voc. The animates, with a Nominative in -s, are generally masculine in nouns and adjectives, but there are also feminine nouns and animate adjectives in -os, probably remains of the old indistinctness of declension.

2. MIE Second Declension is equivalent to the Second Declension in Latin (cf. Lat. dominus, dominī, or uinum, uinī), and to the Omicron Declension in Greek (cf. Gk. λόγος, λόγου, or δῶρον, δῶρου).

o-Declension Paradigm

NOTE. This model could indeed have been written without the initial vowel -o-, given that the probable origin of this vowel is the ending vowel of some thematic stems, while other, primitive athematic stems were reinterpreted thereafter and this vowel was added to stem by way of analogy. So, for thematic stems, as wlqo-, this paradigm could be read Nom. -s, Acc. -m, Voc. -e, Gen. -s, -sio, -so, -ī, and so on.

3. The Nominative and the Genitive in -os can be confused. This can only be solved with lengthenings, as in Gen. -os-io or os-o.

1. Nominative Singular Animate in -os; as in wĺqos, wolf, dómūnos, lord, adj. cwós, alive.

2. Accusative Singular Animate in -om; as in wĺqom, dómūnom, cwóm.

3. Vocative Singular Animate in -e; as in wĺqe, dómūne, cwé.

5. The Nom.-Acc.-Voc. Sg. Inanimate in -om; as in jugóm5, joke, adj. néwom, new, mrwóm, dead.

4. Genitive Singular in -os, -osio, -e/oso  (also -ī); as in wĺqosio, mrwós, dómūnī.

NOTE. The original form -os is rare, as the Genitive had to be distinguished from the Nominative. This disambiguation happens, as already said, by alternatively lengthening the ending or changing it altogether. The o-Declension is probably recent in IE III – even though it happened already in Anatolian – and that's why it is homogeneous in most IE dialects, without variations in vocalism or accent.

6. Dative Singular in -ōi, -ō: wĺqōi, dómūnōi, néwōi, mrwṓ.

7. Locative Singular in -oi, -ei: wĺqoi, dómūnoi, néwoi, mrwói.

8. Instrumental Singular in -ō: wĺqō, cwṓ, néwō, mrwṓ.

9. The Ablative Singular is formed in -ōd, and sometimes in -ēd: wĺqōd, cwṓd, néwōd.

 

1. The Thematic Plural system is usually depicted as follows:

NOTE. The ending -ōs is usually considered as derived from the plural ending -es, i.e. *-o-(s)-es > -ōs.

2. The Nominative-Vocative Animate Plural in -ōs; as, wĺqōs, dómūnōs, wrōs.

3. The Accusative Animate Plural in -oms; as, wĺqoms, dómūnoms, mrtóms.

4. The Nom.-Voc.-Acc. Inanimate Plural in -ā, -a; as,  jug/jugá, néwa, mrwá.

5. The Genitive Plural in -ōm/-om (and -ēm); as, wĺqōm, dómūnōm, ceiwṓm, jugṓm.

6. The Instrumental-Locative Plural in -ois/-oisi; -ōis/-ōisi, and also, as in the other declensions, Obliques in -bhis, -bhos, -bhios (-mis, -mos); as, wĺqisi, wrōis, néwoisu, mrwṓis.

 

 

1. Third Declension nouns end in i, u (also ī, ū) and Diphthong. The Nominative ending is -s.

2. This declension usually corresponds to Latin nouns of the Third Declension in -i (cf. Lat. ciuis, ciuis, or pars, partis), and of the Fourth Declension in -u (cf. Lat. cornū, cornūs, or portus, portūs).

i/u-Declension Paradigm

NOTE. Reduplication or combination with the alternating endings -i, -ei/-oi and -u, -eu/-ou, was a common resort in the attested dialects that distinguished Dat. and Loc. in this declension, as in -i-ei, -ei-ei, -eu-ei, and so on, to distinguish similar forms. A common distinction of Loc. -i, Dat. -ei, was known to most dialects of Late PIE, while a general Instrumental in lengthened -ī, -ū (from Ins. ending *-e-h₁) was commonly used; the Ablative, when it appears, shows the same declension as the Genitive.

3. The animates in i and u are masculine or feminine (indifferent to the distinction in adjectives); those in ī and ū, always feminine.

4. The -s can indicate Nominative and Genitive: the distinction is made through the full-grade of the vowel before the declension, i.e. Gen. -ei-s for i, -ou-s for u – but for those in -ti, -tu (type II), v.i.

NOTE. The Vocative of the animates is the same as the Nom.-Acc.-Voc. of the inanimates. In nouns differentiation isn’t necessary, because they have different stem vowels; in adjectives, however, a Vocative singular animate -i can be an homophone with Nom.-Acc.-Voc. singular neuter -i; as e.g. m.Voc. albhí, n.Acc. albhí. This is, though, a rare case, in which the context is generally enough for disambiguation.

1. Nominative Singular Animate in -s; as in ówis[149], ewe, nóqtis¹²⁴, night, ghóstis²⁶, guest, sū́nus¹³⁰, son (cf. also Gk. sújus), médhus, mead, egnís, fire, mánus, hand, adj. swādús, sweet, etc.

2. Accusative Singular Animate in -m; as in ówim, nóqtim, ghóstim, sū́num, mánum, etc.

3. Vocative Singular Animate in -ei or -i, -eu or -u; as in ówei-ówi, sū́neu/sū́nou-sū́nu, sometimes the same Nominative form, as systematically in Latin (cf. Lat. hostis).

4. The Nom.-Acc.-Voc. Singular Inanimate in -i, -u; as in móri, pék[150], médhu, swādú¹²³.

5. Genitive Singular in -eis (-ois) or -(t)ios, -eus (-ous), -(t)uos; as in egnéis[151], sū́nous, owéis (also dial. ówios), mánous, pékwos, adj. swādéus.

6. Dative Singular in -(ej)ei, -(ew)ei, -ou, also with long vowel, -ēi, -ōu, egnéi, nóqtei, owéi, etc.

7. Locative Singular in -(ē)i, -(ē)u, Instrumental in -ī, -ū or dial. -bhi; as sū́n(ē)u, owí, ow, etc.

 

1. Its inflection is similar to that of i, u, but they have no alternating vowels before the declension, and the ī and ū are substituted before vowel by -ij, -uw. They are always feminine, and they cannot be inanimates nor adjectives. They are mostly PIE roots, and found mainly in Indo-Iranian.

 

1. There are long diphthongs āu, ēu, ōu, ēi, which sometimes present short vowels, as well as other endings without diphthong, i.e., ā, ē, ō.

NOTE. The last are probably remains of older diphthongs, from IE II. Therefore, even though from the point of view of Late Proto-Indo-European there are only stems with variants āu, ēu, ē, etc, these can all be classified as Diphthong endings, because the original stems were formed as diphthongs in the language history. This kind of irregularities is usual in today's languages, as it was already four millennia ago.

In zero grade Genitives there are forms with -i- or -ij- or -u- or -uw-, depending on the diphthongs.

NOTE.  These are some IE words, usually secondary formations – especially found in Greek – in -eus, -euos, as in Av. bāzāus, Arm, Gk. Basileus, which are also so declined.

1. The following table depicts the general plural system, common to the Fourth Declension.

NOTE. The inanimate plural forms, -a and -ā, correspond to an older stem vowel of an earlier stage of the language, namely *-h₂ and *-eh₂, following the Laryngeals' Theory.

2. Unlike in the Singular, in which only some Nominatives have an -s, in Nom.-Voc. Plural the -s is general, and there is always one fix-grade vowel, e. So, the opposition Singular-Plural in -s/-es is actually a Ø/e distinction. This opposition has also sometimes another mark, the vowel before the ending (see § 4.7).

3. The Nom.-Voc. Plural Animate is normally in -es; as in cówes, ówes, sū́nes, etc.

There are forms in -ei-es for i stems, as in owéjes; in -eu-es for u stems, as in sūnéwes; in ijes, -uwes for ī, ū; as in bhrúwes; etc.

4. The Accusative Plural Animate is in -ms: ówims, sū́nums, cōms/cóums.

NOTE. Some scholars reconstruct for IE III the accusative plural ending -ns, because most of the attested proto-languages show either -ns (as some endings in Sanskrit or Germanic) or long vowel, sometimes with -s. Most of them also admit an original, older -ms form (a logical accusative singular -m- plus the plural mark -s), but they prefer to reconstruct the attested -ns, thus (implicitly) suggesting an intermediate phase common to all proto-languages, i.e.  IE II *-ms > IE III *-ns > proto-languages -[n]s. We don't know if such an intermediate phase happened, and if it did, if it was common to all languages, or if it was common only to those languages which present in some declensions -ns, and in other declensions another endings. What we do know with some certainty is that the form -ms existed, and at least since IE II, as the Anatolian dialects show.

5. Nom.-Voc. Acc. Plural Inanimate in -ā, -a: pékwā, mórja, médhwā, swādwá, etc.

6. Genitive Plural Animate in -om/-ōm (and Gmc. -ēm): ówjom, nóqtjom, sū́nuwēm/sū́nuwom, cówōm, etc.

NOTE. The -m of the Acc. sg. Animate, Nom.-Acc.-Voc. sg. Inanimate and this case could sometimes be confused. It is disambiguated with the vocalic grade of the Genitive, full or lengthened, as the singular is always Ø.

7. The Obliques are generally divided into two groups, in -bh- (that of Lat., Gk., I.-I., Arm., and Cel.) and in -m- (that of Gmc. and Bal.-Sla.). There are, thus, -bhis, -bhos, -bhios, -bhi , and -mis, -mos; as, sū́nubhis, sū́nubhos, sū́nubhios, sū́numis, sū́numos.

There is also another ending possible, that in -s-i, -s-u, s-e, generally Locative (in I.-I. and Bal.-Sla.), but also possibly general Dat.-Loc.-Ins. (as in Greek); as, sū́nusi, sū́nusu, sū́nuse.

In the Oblique Plural specialized system, which is a common feature of Proto-Balto-Slavic and Proto-Indo-Iranian dialects, (and, to some extent, of Proto-Greek and Proto-Armenian), the Instrumental was probably formed adding the plural mark -s to the Instrumental Singular of the Second Declension, -bhi, -mi. The Dat.-Abl. was then opposed in vowel stem to the Instrumental: -bhos or -mos against -bhis or -mis. The Locative was made with an -s marking the plural, and an -i which is the Loc. mark.

NOTE. Its origin is probably the plural mark -s-, to which the local case ending -i is added. This is a general oblique ending in the thematic declension.

1. The Stem of Nouns of the Second Declension ends in Consonant or Sonant, i.e. -n, -r, -s, Occlusive (especially -t), and rarely -l, -m. The inflection of animates is essentially the same as that of the Second or Thematic Declension.

2. Nouns of the Fourth Declension in MIE correspond to Latin nouns of First Declension in -r (cf. Lat. magister, magistrī), and Third Declension in consonant (cf. Lat. prīnceps, prīncipis, phoenīx, phoenīcis, cōnāmen, cōnāminis, etc.), and to the Ancient Greek Labial and Velar declension (cf. Gk. Ἄραψ, Ἄραβος, or Φρύξ, Φρυγός).

The Nominative ending is -s (with Occlusive, -m, -l), but there is also a Nominative Sg. with pure stem vowel (desinence -Ø and lengthened ending vowel), so that the full-grade Vocative is differentiated. And there is no confusion in Nom./Gen., as -s has a different vowel grade (Nom. -s, Gen. -es or -os).

Consonant-Declension Paradigm

NOTE. These specialized Oblique endings were probably already splitting in Late PIE, at least in a dialect-to-dialect basis. Compare Indo-Iranian Dat. -ei, Loc. -i; Italic Dat. -ei, Loc.-Inst.-Abl. -i; Greek Inst. -bhi; in Balto-Slavic Inst. -mi, and so on. There is no exact original pattern that includes every dialect, but we may reliably imply an original Oblique declension -i, which had split into -i (Loc.) and -ei (Dat.) already in Late PIE.

3. Inanimates have pure vowel stems with different vocalic grades. In nouns there should be no confusion at all, as they are different words, but neuter adjectives could be mistaken in Nominative or Vocative Animate. Distinction is thus obtained with vocalism, as in Animate -ōn vs. Inanimate -on, Animate -ēs vs. Inanimate -es (neuter nouns in -s are in -os).

1. Nominative Sg.Animates in -s; as, dṓms, house, pṓds37, foot, bhŕghs128, bury, dṓnts173, tooth.

2. Accusative Singular Animate in -m [m̥]; as, dṓmm, pṓdm, bhŕghm, dṓntm.

3. Vocative Singular Animate in -Ø; a sin pōd, bhrgh, dōnt.

4. The Nom.-Acc.-Voc. Singular Inanimate in -Ø, with various vocalisms; as in krd[153]

5. Genitive Singular in -es/-os; as in péd(e)s/pedés, dént(e)s/dentés, dém(e)s/demés.

6. Dative Singular in -ei: pedéi, dontéi, bhrghéi, etc.

7. Locative Singular in -i: pedí/pédi, dṓnti, bhrghí, etc.

 

1. Nominative Singular Animate in -Ø with lengthened vowel; as in mātḗr/mtēr14, mother, kwōn[154], dog, ghésōr, hand (cf. Hitt. kiššar, Gk. kheirí), órōn139, eagle.

Stems in s, ndher-genḗs, degenerate, génōs32, kin, áusōs69, dawn, nébhōs31, cloud.

2. Accusative Sg. Animate in -m; as in mātérm, kwónm, ndheregenésm, áusosm, ghesérm.

3. Vocative Singular Animate in -Ø with full vowel; as in mātér, kúon, áusos.

4. The Nom.-Acc.-Voc. Singular Inanimate in -Ø; as in nómn, génos.

The adjectives in -s have the neuter in -es: (a)sugenés (cf. Gk. eugenes, O.Ind. suganaḥ)

5. Genitive Singular in -es/-os; as in mātrés/mātrós (also mātŕs, patŕs, bhrtrs, etc.), kunés/kunós, nomnés/nomnós, ornés.

Nouns and adjectives in -s have an e, not an o, as the final stem vowel: genesés, ausosés.

6. Dative Singular in -ei, Locative Singular in -i: mātérei, mātéri, kwónei, ausoséi, ghésri etc.

8. Instrumental Singular in -bhi (dialectal -mi): mātrbhí, kunbhí, ausosbhí, etc.

With a paradigm common to the Third Declension, here are some inflected examples.

 

4.10.1. Nominal Compositum or nominal composition is the process of putting two or more words together to form another word. The new word, called a Compound Word, is either a Noun or an Adjective, and it does not necessarily have the same meaning as its parts.

4.10.2. The second term of a Compound Word may be

a) a Noun (Gk. akró-polis, “high city, citadel”)

b) an Adjective (Gk. theo-eíkelos, “similar to the gods”) or

c) a Noun adapted to the adjectival inflection (Gk. arguró-tozos, “silver arc”)

NOTE. Sometimes a suffix is added (cf. Gk. en-neá-boios, “of nine cows”), and the Compound Noun may have a different gender than the second term (cf. Lat. triuium, “cross roads”, from trēs and uia).

4.10.3. The first term is a Pure Stem, without distinction of word class, gender or number. It may be an Adverb, a Numeral (Gk. trí-llistos, “supplicated three times”, polú-llistos, “very supplicated”) or a Pronoun (cf. O.Ind. tatpuruṣa, “that man”), as well as a Nominal-Verbal stem with Nominal (Gk. andra-phónos, “who kills a man”), Adjetival (Gk. akró-polis), or Verbal function (Gk. arkhé-kakos, “who begins the evil”), and also an Adjective proper (Gk. polú-tropos, “of many resources”).

4.10.4. Usually, the first term has zero-grade, cf. O.Ind. ṇr-hán, Gk. polú-tropos, Lat. aui-(caps), etc. Common exceptions are stems in -e/os, as Gk. sakés-palos, “who shakes the shield” (Gk. sákos, “shield”), and some suffixes which are substituted by a lengthening in -i, cf. Gk. kudi-áneira, “who glorifies men” (Gk. kudrós), Av. bərəzi-čaxra-, “of high wheels” (Av. bərəzant-).

In Thematic stems, however, the thematic -e/o appears always, as an o if Noun or Adjective (Gk. akró-polis), as an e if Verb (Gk. arkhé-kakos).

4.10.5. The first term usually defines the second, the contrary is rare; the main Compound types are:

A. Formed by Verbs, cf. O.Ind. ṇr-hán, Gk. andra-phónos (Gk. andro- is newer) Lat. auceps, O.Sla. medv-ĕdĭ, “honey-eater”, bear, and also with the second term defining the first, as Gk. arkhé-kakos.

B. Nominal Determiners (first term defines the second), with first term Noun (cf. Gk. mētro-pátōr,  “mother’s father”, Goth. þiudan-gardi, “kingdom”), Adective (cf. Gk. akró-polis, O.Sla. dobro-godŭ, “good time”, O.Ir. find-airgit, “white plant”, Lat. angi-portus, “narrow pass”), or Numeral (cf. Lat. tri-uium, from uia, Gk. ámaza, “chariot frame”, from ázōn).

C. Adjectival Determiners (tatpuruṣa- for Indian grammarians), with first term Noun (cf. Gk. theo-eíkelos, Goth. gasti-gods “good for the guests”), Adverb (cf. O.Ind. ájñātas, Gk. ágnotos, “unknown”, phroudos, “who is on its way”, from pró and odós).

D. Possessive Compounds (bahu-vrihi-, “which has a lot of rice”, for Indian grammarians), as in Eng. barefoot, “(who goes) with bare feet”, with the first term Noun (cf. Gk. arguró-tozos, O.Sla. črŭno-vladŭ, “of black hair”), Adjective (cf. Lat. magn-animus, “of great spirit”), Adverb (cf. O.Ind. durmans, GK. dus-menḗs, “wicked”).

The accent could also distinguish the Determiners from the Possessives, as in O.Ind. rāja-putrás, “a king’s son”,  from O.Ind. rajá-putras, “who has a son as king, king’s father”.

 

5. Adjectives

 

2. Other usual numerals (from Latin) are made as follows:

a. Temporals: dwimós, trimós, of two or three years' age; dwiátnis, triátnis, lasting two or three years (from átnos⁶²); dwiménstris, triménstris, of two or three months (from mēns⁶¹); dwiátniom, a period of two years , as Lat. biennium, sṃgheslátniom, millenium.

b. Partitives: dwisnsios, trisnsios, of two or three parts (cf. Eng. binary).

c. Other possible derivatives are: óiniōn, unity, union; dwísniōn, the two (of dice); prwimanos, of the first legion; prwimāsiós, of the first rank; dwísnos (distributive), double, dwisnāsiós, of the second rank, tritāsiós, of the third rang, etc.

NOTE 1. English onion comes from O.Fr. oignon (formerly also oingnon), from Lat. unionem (nom. unio), colloquial rustic Roman for a kind of onion; sense connection is the successive layers of an onion, in contrast with garlic or cloves.

NOTE 2. Most of these forms are taken from Latin, as it has influenced all other European languages for centuries, especially in numerals. These forms are neither the only ones, nor are they preferred to others in this Modern Indo-European system; they are mainly indications. To reconstruct every possible numeral usable in Indo-European is not the aim of this Grammar.

 

6. Pronouns

6.1.1. Pronouns are used as Nouns or as Adjectives. They are divided into the following seven classes:

1. Personal Pronouns: as, eg(ṓ), I.

2. Reflexive Pronouns: as, s(w)e, himself.

3. Possessive Pronouns: as, mos, my.

4. Demonstrative Pronouns: as, so, this; i, that.

5. Relative Pronouns: as, qis, who.

6. Interrogative Pronouns: as, qis?, who?

7. Indefinite Pronouns: as, áliqis, some one.

6.1.2. Pronouns have a special declension.

6.2.1. The Personal pronouns of the first person are eg(ṓ), I, wé(i), we; of the second person, tu, thou or you, ju(s), you. The personal pronouns of the third person - he, she, it, they - are wanting in Indo-European, an anaphoric (or even a demonstrative) being used instead.

NOTE. IE III had no personal pronouns for the third person, like most of its early dialects. For that purpose, a demonstrative was used instead; as, from ki, id, cf. Anatolian ki, Gmc. khi-, Lat. cis-, id, Gk. ekeinos, Lith. sis, O.C.S. si, etc. It is this system the one used in Modern Indo-European; although no unitary form was chosen in Late PIE times, the general pattern (at least in the European or Northwestern dialects) is obvious.

6.2.3. The Personal Pronouns (Non-Reflexive) are declined as follows:

FIRST PERSON

SECOND PERSON

NOTE. Other attested pronouns include 1^st P. Nom. eg(h)óm (cf. O.Ind. ahám, Av. azəm, Hom.Gk. εγων, Ven. ehom); Dat. sg. méghei, tébhei, sébhei in Osco-Umbrian and Slavic; -es endings in Nom. pl., nsmés, jusmés, attested in Att.-Ion. Gk. and Gothic. Also, Osco-Umbrian and Old Indian show variant (tonic or accented) series of Acc. Sg. in -m, as mēm(e), twēm, tewe, usóm, s(w)ēm. The 1^st Person Dative form is often found reconstructed as mébhi/mébhei, as in the 2^nd P. Sg. form.

For the Personal Pronouns of the third person singular and plural, the demonstrative i is used. See §6.5 for more details on its use and inflection.

a. The plural wé(i) is often used for the singular eg(ṓ); the plural ju(s) can also be so used for the singular tu. Both situations happen usually in formal contexts.

b. The forms nsóm, jusóm, etc., can be used partitively:

óinosqisqe nsóm, each one of us.

jusóm ópniom, of all of you.

c. The genitives méi, téi, nsóm, jusóm, are chiefly used objectively:

es mnmōn nsóm, be mindful of us.

6.3.1. Reflexive Pronouns are used in the accusative and the oblique cases to refer to the subject of the sentence or clause in which they stand; as, s(w)e lubhḗieti, he/she loves himself/herself; séwe bhmi, I talk about (of) me, and so on.

a. In the first and second persons, the oblique cases of the personal pronouns were also commonly used as Reflexives: as, me widḗiō (for se widḗiō), I see myself; nos perswādḗiomos (for swe perswādḗiomos), we persuade ourselves, etc.

b. The Reflexive pronoun of the third person has a special form used only in this sense, the same for both singular and plural. It is thus declined:

swe [165]

 

6.4.1. The main Possessive pronouns in Modern Indo-European are:

These are really adjectives of the first type (-ós, -, -óm), and are so declined.

NOTE 1. IE swos is used only as a reflexive, referring to the subject. For a possessive pronoun of the third person not referring to the subject, the genitive of a demonstrative must be used. Thus, (i) swom patérm chénti, (he) kills his [own] father; but (i) patérm éso chénti, (he) kills his [somebody (m.) else's] father.

NOTE 2. Other common Proto-Indo-European forms were méwijos/ménjos, téwijos, séwijos. Forms for the first and second persons are sometimes reconstructed as emós, tewós.

A.     There are older Oblique singular forms which were assimilated to the thematic inflection by some Indo-European dialects, as mói, tói, sói, and its derivatives with -s, -os, -w-, etc

B.     Forms with adjectival suffixes -teros, -eros, were not general in Late PIE, although the forms are common to many European languages; as, nserós/nsterós, userós/usterós, etc.

6.4.3. Other forms are the following:

a. A possessive qosós, -, -óm, whose, is formed from the genitive singular of the relative or interrogative pronoun (qi/qo). It may be either interrogative or relative in force according to its derivation, but is usually the former.

b. The reciprocals one another and each other may be expressed with PIE meitós (cf. Goth. missō, O.Ind. mithá-, Lat. mūtuus, Gk. μοῖτος, Bal-Sla. meitu-, etc.) or other common expressions, as Lat. énter s(w)e or álteros...álterom, Gmc. óinos...álterom (cf. Eng. one another, Ger. einander), etc.

álteros álterī áutoms déukonti[166] (or óinos álterī áutoms déukonti), they drive each other's cars (one... of the other);

énter se lubhḗionti (or lubhḗionti álteros álterom), they love one another (they love among themselves); and so on.  

6.5. Anaphoric Pronouns

6.5.1. Anaphora is an instance of an expression referring to another, the weak part of the deixis. In general, an anaphoric is represented by a pro-form or some kind of deictic. They usually don't have adjectival use, and are only used as mere abbreviating substitutes of the noun.

NOTE. The old anaphorics are usually substituted in modern Indo-European dialects by demonstratives.

They are usually integrated into the pronoun system with gender; only occasionally some of these anaphorics have been integrated into the Personal Pronouns system in Indo-European languages.

6.5.2. Modern Indo-European has a general anaphoric pronoun based on PIE root i. It can also be added to old e forms, hence éi.

NOTE. This root i is also the base for common IE relative jo.

6.5.3. The other demonstrative, so/to, functions as anaphoric too, but tends to appear leading the sentence, being its origin probably the relative. They are also used for the second term in comparisons.

NOTE. Modern IE languages have sometimes mixed both forms to create a single system, while others maintain the old differentiation.

6.6.1. The Demonstrative Pronouns so, this, and i, that, are used to point out or designate a person or thing for special attention, either with nouns, as Adjectives, or alone, as Pronouns, and are so declined:

so/to[167], this

 NOTE. Different variants are observed in the attested dialects: 1) Nom. so is also found as sos in Old Indian, Greek and Gothic, and as se in Latin (cf. Lat. ipse). 2) Nom. sā is found as sī in Gothic and Celtic, also as sjā in Germanic. 3) Nom. Pl. tāi is general, while sāi is restricted to some dialects, as Attic-Ionic Greek. However, linguists like Beekes or Adrados reconstruct the Nominative form in s- as the original Proto-Indo-European form. 4) Oblique forms in -bh-/-m- are sometimes reconstructed as -m- only (Beekes).

i[168], that

Deictic particles which appear frequently with demonstrative pronouns include ko, ki[169], here; en, e/ono[170], there; e/owo, away, again.

NOTE 1. In the origin, qi/qo was possibly a noun which meant “the unknown”, and its interrogative/indefinite sense depended on the individual sentences. Later both became pronouns with gender, thus functioning as interrogatives (stressed) or as indefinites (unstressed).

NOTE 2. The form qi is probably the original independent form (compare the degree of specialization of qo, further extended in IE dialects), for which qo could have been originally the o-grade form (see Beekes, Adrados) – hence our choice of clearly dividing a Substantive-qi from an Adjective-qo in this Modern Indo-European system. Some Indo-European dialects have chosen the o-stem only, as Germanic, while some others have mixed them together in a single paradigm, as Indo-Iranian, Balto-Slavic or Italic. Compare Gmc. khwo- (cf. Goth. hwas, O.N. hverr, O.S. hwe, O.E. hwā, Dan. hvo, O.Fris. hwa, O.H.G. hwër), Lat. qui, quae, quod; quis, quid, Osc. pisi, Umb. púí, svepis, Gk. tis, Sktr. kaḥ, Av. ko, O.Pers. čiy, Pers. ki, Phryg. kos, Toch. kus/kŭse, Arm. ov, inč', Lith. kas, Ltv. kas, O.C.S. kuto, Rus. kto, Pol. kto, O.Ir. ce, cid, Welsh pwy, Alb. kush, Kam. kâča; in Anatolian, compare Hitt. kuiš, Luw. kui-, Lyd. qi-, Lyc. tike, and Carian kuo.

2. The Substantive Interrogative Pronoun qi-? who?, what?, is declined in the Singular as follows:

3. The Adjective Interrogative Pronoun, qo-?, who (of them)? what kind of? what? which? is declined throughout like the Relative:

 Qóteros?, who of two? is derived from the stem qo with the suffix -tero.

4. The Indefinite Pronouns qi/qo, any one, any, are declined like the corresponding Interrogatives.

5. The Adverbial form of the Indefinite-Interrogative pronoun is qu.

1. The pronouns qi and qo appear in various combinations.

a. The forms can be repeated, as in substantive qisqis, qidqid, or adjective qosqos, qāqā, qodqod; with an usual meaning whatever, whoever, whichever, etc.

b. In some forms the copulative conjunction -qe is added to form new pronouns (both as substantives and as adjectives), usually universals; as, qisqe, every one: qoterqe, each of two, or both. Qisqe is declined like the interrogative qi: substantive, qisqe, qidqe, adjective, qosqe, qāqe, qodqe

c. Other forms are those with prefixes – deemed more modern –, like aliqis (substantive), some one, aliqod (adjective), some.

d. Forms with the numerals oino-, sem-, one, are also frequently pronouns; as in óinos, óinā, óinom, and sēms (gen. semós), some, somebody, someone.

óinosqisqe, each one

c. The negatives are usually composed with negation particles, as ne or modal mē. As in néqis, néqos, mḗqis, n()óin(os) (cf. Eng. none, Ger. nein, maybe Lat. nōn), nóin(o)los (Lat. nullus).

In the compound óinosqísqe, each one, every single one, both parts are declined (genitive óinosoqéisoqe), and they may be separated by other words:

ne en óinō qísqis qósqe,  not even in a single one.

h. The relative and interrogative have a possessive adjective qósos (-ā, -om), whose.

i. Other Latin forms are qmtos, how great, and qlis, of what sort, both derivative adjectives from the interrogative. They are either interrogative or relative, corresponding respectively to the demonstratives tmtos, tlis, from to. Indefinite compounds are qmtoskomqe and qliskomqe.

j. It is also found as in compound with relative jo, as in jos qis, jod qid, anyone, anything.

h. An interrogative mo- is also attested in Anatolian and Tocharian.

1. Many Pronouns, Pronominal Adjectives and Adverbs have corresponding demonstrative, relative, interrogative, and indefinite forms in most Indo-European languages. Such parallel forms are called Correlatives. Some of those usable in Modern Indo-European are shown in the following table:

ⁱ Latin (c)ibī, (c)ubī is frequently reconstructed as a conceivable PIE *qibhi, *qobhi, but it is not difficult to find a common origin in PIE qi-dhei, qo-dhei for similar forms attested in different IE dialects; cf. Lat. ubī, Osc. puf, O.Ind. kuha, O.Sla. kude, etc.

NOTE. There are also other series not presented here, as ‘all’ (cf. Lat. omnes, passim, etc.), ‘each one’ (cf. Lat. quisque, etc.), ‘no one’ (cf. Lat. nullus, etc.), identity of the ‘certain’ type (cf. Lat. quidam, etc.), along with the ‘existence’ type (cf. Lat. aliquis, quispiam, etc.), and we could have separated between ‘anyone’ (cf. Lat. quilibet, quivis, Ger. jeder), and ‘whoever’ (cf. Lat. quicumque, Ger. wer auch immer), etc. From Hittite, Latin and Sanskrit most correspondances left should be obtained without too many problems.

 

6.8.1. There are two general pronominal stems used as relative pronouns, one related to the anaphorics and one to the interrogative-indefinites.

6.8.2. Relative Pronoun jo, the o-stem derivative from i. It is inflected like so/to and qo.

6.8.3. qo/qi, who, which, has its origin in the interrogative pronouns, and are declined alike.

NOTE. Relative pronoun jo-, maybe from an older *h₁jo-, is found in Gk. hós, Skr. yá-, Av. ya-, Phryg. ios, Cel. io. Italic and Germanic dialects use qo- as relative, in compound with -qe in Germanic. In Balto-Slavic, this pronouns is suffixed in some adjectives to create indefinites. It is also found as indefinite in compound with qi/qo, as in jós qis, jód qid, anyone, anything, as Gk. hóstis hótti, Skr. yás cit, yác cit.

6.9.1. With Identity pronoun we are referring to the English self, which is formed differently in most Indo-European dialects. The different possibilities are:

1. Those which come from a Pronoun, which are only valid for the third person, formed basically by the anaphoric pronoun lengthened with another particle:

a. Greek autós, as Gk. αὑτός, from adverb áu, newly, and the anaphoric to.

b. Latin identity ídem formed by id and ending -em.

2. Those formed from a Noun, with the sense equal, same, able to modify demonstrative or personal pronouns, and even having an autonomous pronominal use, with a pronoun declension:

The common Indo-European form is derived from adjective somós, same, similar.

NOTE. Common adjective somós, same, and different derivatives from PIE root sem, give Gmc. samaz (cf. O.S., O.H.G., Goth. sama, O.N. sǿmr, O.E. same, O.H.G. samant, Ger. samt, Du. zamelen), Lat. similis, (IE smilís) Gk. ὁμός, ὁμοῦ, ὁμαλός, Skr. samaḥ, Av. hama, O.C.S., O.Russ. самъ, Pol. sam, sаmа, O.Ir. som, sāim (from IE sōmi).

6.10.1. There are two forms to express the opposition of two deictic or anaphoric pronouns.

6.10.2. The first type of opposition is made with the same word, meaning what is different. This is the same as the English either...either sentences.

6.10.3. Modern Indo-European has also terms itself oppositives, apart from the correlation sentences:

a. Derived from the oppositive suffix -tero:

sńteros, different, from which Gmc. suntar, Ger. sonder, Gk ατερ (cf. Gk. ἕτερος, “other, different, uneven”), Lat. sine, “without”, O.Ind. sanutar, O.Sla. svene, O.Ir. sain 'uariē'.

qóteros, either (of two), and qúteros (as Lat. uter), formed with adverb qu (from interrogative-indefinite qi/qo). The later appears also in common Indo-European loan from Lat. neuter, MIE neqúteros, “neither one nor the other”.

NOTE. The oldest interrogative form is probably qóteros?, who of two?, attested in different IE dialects.

álteros, the other, already seen.

NOTE. Another form is that of the deictic en-/eno- and -teros, as in enteros, also anteros (influenced by alteros), found in Germanic and Balto-Slavic dialects.

b. The Stem al-, ali- is very common in Modern Indo-European, the -i being a characteristic lengthening of the pronouns and not an adjectival one. Some usual forms are álios, álidhei (usually reconstructed as *álibhi), áliqis, etc.