# iuvenesco



## Michael Zwingli

Just checking myself on something. I am of the opinion that the verb _ iuvenēscō _cannot be translated "I rejuvenate", since "to rejuvenate" means "to make young/youthful", while _iuvenēscō_ seems to mean "I become youthful/young again", which seems to imply more of a passive voice, perhaps as "I am rejuvenated". Am I on the right track with respect to this?


----------



## Starless74

Hello, Michael
yes, you're definitely on the right track.
Here's a reliable source: *iŭvĕnesco* (mind: the first two vowels are short  ).


----------



## Michael Zwingli

Thanks much! Sometimes I need verification of my thought processes.


----------



## Snodv

Interesting!  But I wouldn't call it a sort of passive.  The _-sc-_ verbs are verbs of becoming (inchoatives) but there is not necessarily an agent acting on the object or person causing the becoming.  Cf. _adolesco_, I am growing up, becoming a grownup, but no one is doing it to me.  On the other hand, the perfect participle _adultus_ certainly seems passive!  (Side note:  the conjugated forms of Italian _capire _look as if they came from inchoative forms.  _Capisco_ is "I understand," but was it once, as it evolved from Latin, "I am starting to grasp it"?)


----------



## bearded

Snodv said:


> but was it once, as it evolved from Latin, "I am starting to grasp it"?)


Originally it was so, yes. But the 'inchoative' meaning  (in many irregular verbs with -sc- forms ) is lost nowadays.  There are a great number of such verbs, e.g. _pulire:  io pulisco _simply means ''I clean up/I'm cleaning up'', not ''I start to clean up''.


----------



## Starless74

bearded said:


> Originally it was so, yes. But the 'inchoative' meaning (in many irregular verbs with -sc- forms ) is lost nowadays.


This is even more interesting when considering the Latin forms '-sco' derived from the homophonic Ancient Greek, where such verbal forms weren't necessarily 'incohative'.


----------



## Scholiast

@bearded (# 5)

Interesting. Is modern Italian _pulire_ from Lat. _polire_?

Σ


----------



## bearded

Yes, it is. The meaning is now slightly different.


----------



## bearded

Starless74 said:


> considering the Latin forms '-sco' derived from the homophonic Ancient Greek


Is that a sure thing?  I always thought that _gignosko _and _cognosco _were just similar, parallel forms from IE , and not one deriving from the other.


----------



## Scholiast

Sorry, bearded, _cognoscere_ is not a parallel with γιγνώσκω, it is _con_ + _noscere_. The reduplication of γιγ- is common in Greek (cf. e.g. πίπτειν), and crops up in Latin too, especially in perfect stems (_cano_, _cecini_, _do_, _dedi_, _tango_, _tetigi_ etc). And of course the _(g)no_[_sc_]_-_ bit is common IE (German _kennen_, Engl. 'know'). Time to consult Ahlavj?

Σ


----------



## bearded

Scholiast said:


> _cognoscere_ is not a parallel with γιγνώσκω


I'm aware of that.  That's why I underlined the common part -gnosco. But you are right, I didn't express myself too accurately.  My point is that the Latin suffix -sco is probably an independent formation, not deriving from Greek.


----------



## ahvalj

Yes, _-sc-_ is the outcome of the common Indo-European verbal suffix: _-skʲ-__._ Wiktionary forgets Hittite, where virtually any verb had a pair with the suffix _-sk-_ expressing an imperfective meaning (with inchoative as one of the possibilities). The Latin and Greek verbs you're discussing are both inherited: _*gʲn̥hₒ-skʲ-_ “to recognize”. Another common verb with this suffix is _*pr̥kʲ-skʲ-_ “to ask”.


----------



## Scholiast

gratias amico nostro Petersburgensi, necnon amicis ubique.

And a Guid N'Year from Scotland. Apologies for resurrecting an older Thread, but I am tidying some things up, and this of course came to light. 


ahvalj said:


> *pr̥kʲ-skʲ-


I am moved to wonder whether rather than _poscere_ this is more closely related to _precari_, and to _frage_(_n_) in German.
Σ


----------



## Sobakus

Scholiast said:


> I am moved to wonder whether rather than _poscere_ this is more closely related to _precari_, and to _frage_(_n_) in German.


They're all related, but it's _poscere_ < _*pork-sk-_ that directly continues _*pr̥kʲ-skʲ-_, while _precārī_ is secondarily formed to _prex._


----------

