SYNTAX. Only the chief points can lie noticed here. First. as to the syntax of nouns: The old distinction between grammatical and non-gram matical cases cannot be maintained. The nom inative designates the active, the accusative the passive relation. The latter is both an object of a verb and an objeet of thought. this day, me ire rum. 114 mit-verbal objectitieations. With space and time the accusative is still a veiled object-case. The instrumental shows accompaniment. means, limit: the dative, 'to' or 'for;' the genitive, any adjectival relation, 'of,' belonging to;' the abla tive.•source and means, 'from: 'by:' the locative, place or time, 'in.' 'at' syntactical method of Delbrfick assigns to each case a certain narrow function: as either 'in' or 'within' (but not both) to the original locative: `to' or 'for' I but not both) to the dative, etc. But each (pure) case originally contained in itself all that is ascribed to it: the dative from the beginning was a 'to' and a 'for' case; the locative expressed both 'at,' in,' and 'within.' The instrumental survives in adverbial form in Greek. but the Greek dative singular is a locative. The genitive in sic is an adjective stein like that of the pro nouns, asmdka(nt) , nostrunt, nostri, which ex plains in part the syntax of the ease. So the Latin (-genitive may he adjectival (preserved in other Italic dialects instead of changing to of or ci, which would be the locative form). Other genitive syntax is explained as being, due to a sort. of adjective-com pound effect, in that the sign as (os) is probably only a nominative affected by sentence accent. So s is the sign of the nominative as well as of the genitive. The ablative was probably confined at first to the sin gular pronoun. where it seem. to be from an ad verbial affix. Such syntactical growths are com mon, prepositions (adverbs) being affixed also to completed endings to emphasize the meaning, as in is added to the Italic locative. a to the Aves tan locative. or i. to the Latin feminine nomina tive. qua•I (rpor). In the last ease the meaning
is probably only emphatic. just as in English yes-sir-cc. indced-y. The nominative s has been associated with the demonstrative pronoun. The m of the accusative is identical with the in of attain. idam, 405c, idem, though what shade of meaning it may have had is as impossible to ex plain, as is the pseudo-ending of the German m i-ch . The neuter nominative in m has been as borrowed from the nominative. on the ground that neuters were originally not sub jects of verbs: but this is improbable.
In verbs present tense-stem connotes durative t inte : the :wrist. unrestrieted time, either inchoative 01. resultant ; the perfect, peated present (inchoative or intensive) ; the future, modally affected future (will). The subjunctive gives the idea of the unrestricted indicative with the addition of a -hall or will ele ment (time and mode) the optative expresses should or might: the imperative. a command. 71 e aorist may be present or preterite 111 time and from the pre:ent-stem meaning only in its quality, since it does not continued or durative time. Thus Sanskrit yareluai, present, is 'he continues a-going,' but ficiti, aorist, is he goes.' Ihe present may thus do duty for a future, as in Gothic. Tim verbal stem being (.0incident with the noun-stem, the sense ut ',hood( is really 'a hearing, that' or 'he is a-bearing,' rather than 'is a bearer.' The re duplication of the perfect eonnects it with the reduplicated present desiderative, and intensive forms, and in its first application it connotes present time, afterwards extended to past time, perhaps helped thereto by the pluperfect (with augment ), which in Sanskrit is not so much a pluperfect as a reduplicated aorist. The tense of narrative was originally the imperfect, not the aorist. The syntax of the Greek aorist is complicated by the confusion of :wrist and im perfeet form:. In Sanskrit, future (will and mire future) and optative complement each other and eventually suppress the subjunctive altogether.